"those that come to America should speak english"- the bastards view

[lazyhappy]

I hate when people say that! i mean i view that as a hypocrite saying!

why?:
because when my white ancestors came from Europe to the americas, it's not like they spoke indian because the people that lived here did. no! we just took the land and brought our language with us

America is supposed to be a free country and so i think people should be able to come here no matter what language they speak or who they are.


---
my questions:
what do u think about the statement: "those that come to America should speak english"
what is your view on Illegal Immagration

[Tarrick]

First of all, they should learn to speak the language because it's the language of the country. No other country that I can think of doesn't expect immigrants to not learn the language of the land, so why should we bend over for people that don't want to learn English?

As for Illegal Immigration, it's that: Illegal. You can claim all you want that the first settlers were "illegal" but the locals were not a sovereign nation like we are today. They were tribes of people that control local areas or were nomads when the English/Spanish/French/Dutch all started settling here.

As for America being "free", how is it free? Can people speak whatever language they want? Sure. But should businesses be able to say, "You must speak English if you want a job here"? Yes. You can't say America is free and at the same time force that "freedom" down the throats of others.

[lazyhappy]

first of, we are not other countries, we are america...

and all u listed were excuses...

1: English is the hardest language to learn on the planet
2: there isn't enough classes for all the people to learn to speak english, so even if they wanted to, its practically impossible for them to learn, look it up.
3: As i said before, we came here without speaking the native language, why should others?

and i view that people should make it easier to come to America, because you have to wait years, and if my country sucked, which it did for my ancestors, i'd want to move as fast as i can and allow my family to live a good life

and america is the most free country in the world... and i view we should make it moreso.

[Tarrick]

Am I an advocate of legal immigration? Hell yeah. But I draw the line between legal and illegal. I have nothing against immigration so long as they don't try and skirt the system and by-pass all the people that are trying to do it legally.

As for English...just because it's hard doesn't give them an excuse to not try anyways. With immersion courses and dedicated work I think that most people would at least get a grasp of it to be considered "proficient". Also, this is America: If there is a demand for classes, there will be classes.

[lazyhappy]

Am I an advocate of legal immigration? Hell yeah. But I draw the line between legal and illegal. I have nothing against immigration so long as they don't try and skirt the system and by-pass all the people that are trying to do it legally.

As for English...just because it's hard doesn't give them an excuse to not try anyways. With immersion courses and dedicated work I think that most people would at least get a grasp of it to be considered "proficient". Also, this is America: If there is a demand for classes, there will be classes.

I bet some of those people did try to do it legally, i mean no one wants to be here illegally... it wasn't a decision... if my country sucked, i'd definatley rebel against the laws for my family and come here. I mean america is pretty nice if u ask me.

And did you not listen? i read that thier are huge waiting lists to get into those classes, even ones that are waited for years... You can't demand them to know english when it's practically impossible to get into the classes! alot of them are trying, just open your mind and see it.

[qwerty]

At the end of the day I believe a person should be able to come to a country without speaking the national language. (If a person is seeking asylum, then the last thing they have time to do is learn English while their hiding for their life).

As for refusing to learn once they get to the country, well that's a tricky one. I believe in integration, meaning that both cultures should embrace aspects of one another (if they learn english then surely you can learn to accept their religious views). So what I get from a person who doesn't actively try is that the person left their old country and they expect the new country to be the same.
I'm wondering maybe if their was a greater push by the governments to teach english then you may see a better take up?

If I was in a new country and I didn't speak the language and people were hostile to me rather than accepting I'm sure I would be confused and would have a hard time figuring out how to fit into the society (I imagine even harder to find a place that could teach me English and the national tongue well if I couldn't read the signs).

Finally, government departments dealing with diplomats have an estimate of up to 2 years for a person to fully capture the language and day to day culture (these diplomats have pretty good resources to do this). So for a first generation immigrant I wonder what the average time to integrate is?

[wise]

I hate when people say that! i mean i view that as a hypocrite saying!

why?:
because when my white ancestors came from Europe to the americas, it's not like they spoke indian because the people that lived here did. no! we just took the land and brought our language with us

America is supposed to be a free country and so i think people should be able to come here no matter what language they speak or who they are.


---
my questions:
what do u think about the statement: "those that come to America should speak english"
what is your view on Illegal Immagration

Call me a bastard then. You want to be an American to be free, speak its official language. I don't buy the excuse that "it's hard to learn". Boo hoo.

[lazyhappy]

I believe in integration, meaning that both cultures should embrace aspects of one another

yes as strong as i am in my oppinions, i do believe they should try to embrace eachother

Call me a bastard then. You want to be an American to be free, speak its official language. I don't buy the excuse that "it's hard to learn". Boo hoo.

oh... trust me sweet pea.. i did...

and that was not my only fucking reason... and that was no excuse. English, with all it's rules, is in fact the hardest language (look it up). don't just comment on that reason. what about the fact there isn't enough classes? the fact that we are hypocrites for demanding them to learn the language which we brought here from europe?

Don't give half-assed reasons and shit back. As much as i disagree with Tarrick in the immigration belief, atleast he gave good reasons for the other side.

[wise]

If you don't like my answer fine. I don't bother with explanation after explanation. If you don't like the answer, that's fine with me sweet pea.

I think you're full of excuses for people who have no business being here in the first place. If you're legal, then enroll in an English As A Second Language class. They're everywhere and even offered by many employers, community education classes. Don't give me the it's too hard routine.

Do you want some cheese with that whine?

[Lucid]

1: English is the hardest language to learn on the planet

It is a difficult language to master, but it's not, as you say, the hardest language. Russian, Finnish, Chinese and many others are actually much more difficult.

and america is the most free country in the world... and i view we should make it moreso.

In fact, America has more laws and more people in prison than any other country in the world. Not per-capita. More people. Period. We have more people in prison than China does. We have more people in prison than India does.

As for learning English, I think it would be in the best interest of those immigrating here to be able to function in an English-speaking society. If they don't learn english they are more likely to be taken advantage of and less likely to find employment. If I were to move to another country I'd want to learn their language just so I could function.
As I see it, it's up to them. If they don't chose to learn English it's only themselves that they hurt. I won't, for example, learn Russian to speak with a Russian immigrant who has moved here and neglected to learn English.
However, I may learn Russian for fun. :cool:

The illegal immigration issue is a tough one. I understand why they want to come here. I am sorry for their troubles. But it is in the best interest of my country if there are less illegals here. And I mean all illegals, not just Mexican ones. At the end of the day, I'm interested in the well-being of my country first and foremost. I'm in favor of trying to help other countries, but I still think that for us, our own problems need to come first.
Also, the people who really prosper off illegal labor are business owners. The illegals (while I'm sure it's better than their native country) live in horrible conditions here and this often leads to an increase in crime. In addition, most blue collar jobs are being affected by illegal labor. Not just the jobs citizens don't want, also the plumbing, the drywalling, the construction, etc. There are citizens who need those jobs and need them to pay a decent wage.
On top of all that, many illegals steal the identities of naturalized citizens or those born here with similar ethnic backgrounds. Illegal Russians steal the identities of legal people with Russian names, illegal Hispanics steal the identities of citizens with Hispanic names, and the illegal Canadians (the most wily illegals of all!) steal the identities of citizens with Canadian names. ;)
These are not good things for our country. I think that the naturalization process may need to be improved upon (I know someone who's now been waiting 7 years... and that's just ridiculous), but there's still no excuse.
The United States takes a lot of strength from the diversity of its citizens, and I hope we're able to continue to do this, but having a huge population of people who are here illegally is bad for everyone.

[ShaiGar]

I believe that nations that are signatories to the united nations declaration of human rights should obey it as law, regardless of whether they ratified it or not.

Making the concept of "illegal immigration" against internation law.

[lazyhappy]

Do you want some cheese with that whine?

:suspicious:...
---

It is a difficult language to master, but it's not, as you say, the hardest language. Russian, Finnish, Chinese and many others are actually much more difficult.

yeah your right, i took that one out of my ass but it is still hard... with our random rules like "i before e unless after c"... i mean that rule doesn't even work half the time!

and it was my english teacher who said that english is the hardest language because as you go on in life, thier is more and more rules in the english language... i know it was stupid to use one oppinion on my reasoning though... but it seemed right at the time

In fact, America has more laws and more people in prison than any other country in the world. Not per-capita. More people. Period. We have more people in prison than China does. We have more people in prison than India does.

holy crap! i knew we had alot, but more then china?...

asides i know that it isn't the exact definition as free, but it is one of the only countries were we can rise up against the government unlike canada... and we have our freedom of speech and stuff... unlike iraq

As for learning English, I think it would be in the best interest of those immigrating here to be able to function in an English-speaking society. If they don't learn english they are more likely to be taken advantage of and less likely to find employment. If I were to move to another country I'd want to learn their language just so I could function.

hmmm... that is a very good point... they would be taken advantage of. that is a good reason why they should learn english. however what is your view on not enough classes and the waiting to be in them? Even if they wanted to learn english, they couldn't. or what is your view on illegal immagration period? do you think we should make it easier for people to come here?

but man! this is the first time i thought about this. you opened my mind alot... now i suggest that they should learn english but i don't think it should be a thing were they have to

[lazyhappy]

I believe that nations that are signatories to the united nations declaration of human rights should obey it as law, regardless of whether they ratified it or not.

Making the concept of "illegal immigration" against internation law.

... yes it is law, but if it takes years of paperwork, and your country sucks, your constantly being held down by the government and people, would you not want to leave as soon as possible too? would you not do it so your family can finally live?, thats why i think my ancestors left europe and junk to move here

[ShaiGar]

... yes it is law, but if it takes years of paperwork, and your country sucks, your constantly being held down by the government and people, would you not want to leave as soon as possible too? would you not do it so your family can finally live?, thats why i think my ancestors left europe and junk to move here
I suggest you read the UNDoHR again, the articles make no stipulations.

[Lights]

Out of curiosity, why don't we allow the illegals who are already here the opportunity to earn citizenship? If people are willing to put in the effort to learn the language and meet some requirements, then why would they not deserve the same opportunity as anyone here? As far as learning the language, I think it's fair enough that if a person is to come here and expect the same rights and privileges as any American, then they should also have to put in the same work as any American. I had to learn English, so why shouldn't they?

[ShaiGar]

Actually what would be more interesting would be if people could lose their citizenship through acts of stupidity or not being able to write their own language after the age of 18. "ur" would be grounds for exile.

[Lucid]

Out of curiosity, why don't we allow the illegals who are already here the opportunity to earn citizenship?

I thought they were talking about doing that. The thing is that as it stands right now the process to become a citizen is extremely long and it's also somewhat difficult. Most people can't do it without a lawyer, and that's expensive.
However, people still do it every day. The system needs work, but the fact that it's difficult is no excuse to be illegal. In fact, I hear that it's harder to become a naturalized citizen in Mexico than it is here.

and it was my english teacher who said that english is the hardest language because as you go on in life, thier is more and more rules in the english language

I understand why you'd take the word of your English teacher... but while we have many inconsistencies in the English language, you should look at the list of how to pluralize things in German. There's a lot of different ways and there's no rhyme or reason about when to use which method. Also, German has a feminine case, a masculine case and a neuter case and it can be difficult for english speakers to master when to use which (since our feminine or masculine cases only apply to living things, whereas German, like most other European languages, applies to inanimate objects. Spanish does the same thing.) Finnish, Russian and Chinese are even harder I understand, although I have never tried to learn them so I can't testify to that personally or tell you why. If anyone does know, I'd be interested to learn.
Compared to most languages, English can be easier because there is so much English speaking media in the world, most people get lots of exposure to it from a young age. Just like Spanish was easier for me to learn than German because I live in an area where lots of Spanish is spoken. If I lived in Western Europe I think German would probably be easier because I'd be around it more.

asides i know that it isn't the exact definition as free, but it is one of the only countries were we can rise up against the government unlike canada... and we have our freedom of speech and stuff... unlike iraq

Hasn't Quebec been on the verge of secession for the last few decades? I have no idea where this anti-Canadian sentiment is coming from. They have freedom of speech in Canada. In most Western countries for that matter. I'm puzzled by this.
And I'm not sure why you think we can rise up against the government here. When was the last time you saw anyone try?

[ScottH]

Consider the American population. Which amongst us would risk what illegal immigrants risk to enter America to improve our lifestyle, or the future for our children.

I would.

So I cast not a single dispersion towards those that choose that route.

We don't' stop them. They benefit, we may or may not. If it really harmed our economy or society, we'd stop them. Until we do, I say praise those that take the risks; praise any risk-takers who strive for the American dream. It is, in many, many ways, more American than living off welfare and disability.

I invite anybody willing to work hard to be American, regardless what language they speak.

Just my 2 cents :-)

[apex.predator]

balkanization

(bawl-kuh-nuh-ZAY-shuhn)
Division of a place or country into several small political units, often unfriendly to one another. The term balkanization comes from the name of the Balkan Peninsula, which was divided into several small nations in the early twentieth century.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[rocksteady]

Actually what would be more interesting would be if people could lose their citizenship through acts of stupidity or not being able to write their own language after the age of 18. "ur" would be grounds for exile.
I like this train of thought, but am a little discouraged in accepting because of my shady past filled with "acts of stupidity" :stunned:

[Lucid]

I like this train of thought, but am a little discouraged in accepting because of my shady past filled with "acts of stupidity" :stunned:

Yes, I think almost everyone over the age of 22 would have been deported by now. :cool:

[ShaiGar]

No, it'd depend on the definition of "acts of stupidity". And "Desired Psychological Temperments"

[rwyatt365]

Sorry for being late to the party! But to the OP's questions I have to agree with Lucid;
As for learning English, I think it would be in the best interest of those immigrating here to be able to function in an English-speaking society. If they don't learn english they are more likely to be taken advantage of and less likely to find employment. If I were to move to another country I'd want to learn their language just so I could function.

As I see it, it's up to them. If they don't chose to learn English it's only themselves that they hurt. I won't, for example, learn Russian to speak with a Russian immigrant who has moved here and neglected to learn English.
Learning the language of the country where you reside only makes sense. If a person wishes to remain marginalized in the country then they can make the choice not to do so.

On the question of illegal immigration I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, in today's international political climate, can a country afford to have "open" borders? That's an invitation for potential threats to enter the country and wreak havoc. On the other hand I think that closing the borders entirely smacks of an "isolationist" mentality that is against the spirit of the US, and will only serve to weaken the country in the long run.

I think that a policy that says in effect, "OK, you're here. So let's work on incorporating you (the illegal alien) into the US as a legal citizen." Add to that some streamlining to the citizenship process (which I can imagine it is sorely in need of), and we can begin to change the "problem" into a workable solution.

[Lucid]

I think that a policy that says in effect, "OK, you're here. So let's work on incorporating you (the illegal alien) into the US as a legal citizen." Add to that some streamlining to the citizenship process (which I can imagine it is sorely in need of), and we can begin to change the "problem" into a workable solution.

Yes, I agree. Right now we have something like 9 million? 11 million? illegal immigrants. It's incredibly expensive to deport them all and they usually just come back anyway. There needs to be a way to make this problem into a solution.

[rwyatt365]

Yes, I agree. Right now we have something like 9 million? 11 million? illegal immigrants. It's incredibly expensive to deport them all and they usually just come back anyway. There needs to be a way to make this problem into a solution.
Exactly! Worried that "illegals" are taking jobs from US citizens? Make them citizens and there's not a problem (plus it's an increased tax-base). Stop looking at this as a "problem" and turn it into an "opportunity".

Of course, sweat shops and under-the-table service industries might not like it - having to pay true wages - but I'm sure they're smart enough to find another way to expolit them (that's just my cynical side showing).

[rocksteady]

No, it'd depend on the definition of "acts of stupidity". And "Desired Psychological Temperments"

ooh, lets draw up some guidelines.

act of stupidity #1 - no loud conversations on cell phone in public


(that would keep me safe from deportation!)

[ShaiGar]

act of stupidity #2 - no standing on an escalator and holding up traffic when you should be moving.

[rocksteady]

act of stupidity #2 - no standing on an escalator and holding up traffic when you should be moving.


shit, bye guys!

[Henry]

I hate when people say that! i mean i view that as a hypocrite saying!

why?:
because when my white ancestors came from Europe to the americas, it's not like they spoke indian because the people that lived here did. no! we just took the land and brought our language with us

America is supposed to be a free country and so i think people should be able to come here no matter what language they speak or who they are.


---
my questions:
what do u think about the statement: "those that come to America should speak english"
what is your view on Illegal Immagration

Purely philosophical, so no real objective answer either way, but here's my two cents:

Government is an institution created by citizens because they are better off with it than without. Government should institute policies that reflect the greatest good for the greatest number of its citizens, provide said policies do not violate key individual rights. Illegal immigration in its current form is an overwhelming social blight, and an economic negative for everyone but the very wealthy. Government has providence to remove per greatest good for greatest number of citizens, illegals have no right to be here.

Immigration itself can be a good thing, but it needs to be controlled for security reasons, social benefit maximized if the group of immigrants comes from culturally diverse backgrounds, and the net benefit to society will be largest if we have a "educated workers first, then skilled, then unskilled" policy.

[stasis]

Call me a bastard then. You want to be an American to be free, speak its official language. I don't buy the excuse that "it's hard to learn". Boo hoo.
The United States has no official language.

[Lucid]

Government is an institution created by citizens because they are better off with it than without. Government should institute policies that reflect the greatest good for the greatest number of its citizens, provide said policies do not violate key individual rights.

Philosophy major? This is Hume, isn't it? It's been several years since I had political philosophy.

[rocksteady]

Purely philosophical, so no real objective answer either way, but here's my two cents:

Government is an institution created by citizens because they are better off with it than without. Government should institute policies that reflect the greatest good for the greatest number of its citizens, provide said policies do not violate key individual rights.

Government also gives immense power to a small group of individuals, and history has shown that time and time again, this power corrupts. The answer is not to have government as the benevolent giver, but as a utilitarian service that provides the essentials to a comfortable life, and no more.

thats what I believe.

[Henry]

Philosophy major? This is Hume, isn't it? It's been several years since I had political philosophy.

No. Philosophy reader in my spare time.

Its my own twist on Bentham. I can see how you'd get Hume from that as well. Bentham's traditionally summarized by "greatest good for greatest number". That's a good way to make decisions, but individual rights need to be considered as well in my view. I haven't read enough of him to know his thoughts on individual rights, so I can't say for certain either way.

[radioactivez0r]

Isn't that along the lines of Mill's Utilitarianism, too?

[Lucid]

No. Philosophy reader in my spare time.

Its my own twist on Bentham. I can see how you'd get Hume from that as well. Bentham's traditionally summarized by "greatest good for greatest number". That's a good way to make decisions, but individual rights need to be considered as well in my view. I haven't read enough of him to know his thoughts on individual rights, so I can't say for certain either way.

You know, it seems like most political issues come down to a clash between the rights of the individual and the good of society. I think the immigration issue is no exception.

[Henry]

You know, it seems like most political issues come down to a clash between the rights of the individual and the good of society. I think the immigration issue is no exception.

Society says "All your base are belong to us". The individual is politically dead.

I don't believe that illegal immigrants have many rights beyond the basics like "not to be murdered".

[Lucid]

Society says "All your base are belong to us". The individual is politically dead.

I don't believe that illegal immigrants have many rights beyond the basics like "not to be murdered".

Well I don't think they have any rights in countries other than their own. But there seems to be an argument that they have the right to a better standard of living than they get in their country of origin, regardless of their legal status here. That's what I was referring to.

[niffer]

At the end of the day I believe a person should be able to come to a country without speaking the national language. (If a person is seeking asylum, then the last thing they have time to do is learn English while their hiding for their life).

As for refusing to learn once they get to the country, well that's a tricky one. I believe in integration, meaning that both cultures should embrace aspects of one another (if they learn english then surely you can learn to accept their religious views). So what I get from a person who doesn't actively try is that the person left their old country and they expect the new country to be the same.
I'm wondering maybe if their was a greater push by the governments to teach english then you may see a better take up?

If I was in a new country and I didn't speak the language and people were hostile to me rather than accepting I'm sure I would be confused and would have a hard time figuring out how to fit into the society (I imagine even harder to find a place that could teach me English and the national tongue well if I couldn't read the signs).

Finally, government departments dealing with diplomats have an estimate of up to 2 years for a person to fully capture the language and day to day culture (these diplomats have pretty good resources to do this). So for a first generation immigrant I wonder what the average time to integrate is?

I agree with this. It would be for their benefit if they were planning to stay in the country and learned the language too...not only do they win the respect of the locals but they will find getting around easier.

I also want to point out that when north americans go to other countries on vacation, a lot of us expect the people and store owners in places that are used to tourists to speak our language, and we get angry and frustrated when they don't. It is disrespectful, and wrong to have the view that the world is supposed to cater to our every whim. We should learn to rough it a little. North americans are the minority. Intolerance is not the way to go, just because we have money.

[rwyatt365]

I also want to point out that when north americans go to other countries on vacation, a lot of us expect the people and store owners in places that are used to tourists to speak our language, and we get angry and frustrated when they don't. It is disrespectful, and wrong to have the view that the world is supposed to cater to our every whim. We should learn to rough it a little. North americans are the minority. Intolerance is not the way to go, just because we have money.
I agree 100% with you on that niffer.

I spent 9 months working in Italy (as a contract programmer) and I was appalled at the lack of effort of my fellow Americans to learn even a little bit if Italian. Whenever we went anywhere I tried to separate myself from them because I was so embarassed.

BTW - I learned some (poor, but passable) Italian while there, and I never asked anyone to speak to me in English. Many times I was mistaken for being North African!

[The Rose]

I know that some people want to makes us feel bad for thinking that English should be declared the National language, and I did feel bad for a long time, until I heard an advocate for making English the national language share how his wife was from a foreign country. He had an inside view on how it affects a person's life when they don't know the English language. He is an advocate for making English the National Language - and thus mandatory - because it's better for the immigrant if they learn English. So I'm not going to let anyone make me feel bad when someone who is familiar with the other side says it's a good thing.

My family is bi-lingual, French and English. In the old days, and maybe still today, people would congregate together in neighborhoods so they could deal with others who also spoke their language. All the "Chinatowns" in the US are a good example of this. My hometown was 85% French-speaking (actually bilingual) when I was a kid. I don't blame people one bit for wanting to preserve their culture and their language. I just think they need to add English to it.

[Lucid]

I don't blame people one bit for wanting to preserve their culture and their language. I just think they need to add English to it.

Agreed. It's actually kind of a shame that most people in the US have lost the languages of their ancestors. One side of my family came here from Denmark 3 generations ago. My grandmother can speak some Danish, but my mother and I only know one word. I'd like to learn it, but nobody offers Danish classes, since it's not a widely spoken language. :(

I spent 9 months working in Italy (as a contract programmer) and I was appalled at the lack of effort of my fellow Americans to learn even a little bit if Italian. Whenever we went anywhere I tried to separate myself from them because I was so embarassed.

That is embarrassing. Especially if you are there for so long. I visited Europe a few years ago and went to 4 different countries in 2 weeks. I couldn't learn 4 different languages in time (although I already spoke a bit of German), so I studied a phrase book and tried to learn some important phrases and words (such as "Excuse me," "I'm sorry," etc.) and had some success with it. There were still plenty of times we had to ask the other party if they could speak English though and I felt like an ignorant American each time.
But I think that most people (and this is true of people in the US as well), will be more accommodating if it's obvious you're at least making the effort.

[The Rose]

With any luck, there'll soon be an electronic device that will translate for us.
You could push one button for common phrases (like they have for a severely autistic gal I know)
and allow input of sentences for non-standard communication.

[rocksteady]

With any luck, there'll soon be an electronic device that will translate for us.
You could push one button for common phrases (like they have for a severely autistic gal I know)
and allow input of sentences for non-standard communication.

a babelfish!

the bad thing is that human language seems to be incredibly difficult for computers to interpret and process. I give it about 15 years until we have some useful form of this tech.

[Bossy Mom]

first of, we are not other countries, we are america...

and all u listed were excuses...

1: English is the hardest language to learn on the planet
2: there isn't enough classes for all the people to learn to speak english, so even if they wanted to, its practically impossible for them to learn, look it up.
3: As i said before, we came here without speaking the native language, why should others?

and i view that people should make it easier to come to America, because you have to wait years, and if my country sucked, which it did for my ancestors, i'd want to move as fast as i can and allow my family to live a good life

and america is the most free country in the world... and i view we should make it moreso.

English is not the hardest language to learn on the planet - there are much more difficult languages, like Polish.

Legal immigrants who come here must learn English. How does a person communicate with police, salesmen, etc.? How do their children get an education? We cannot have the Tower of Babel.

I majored in Spanish and minored in German, but common sense dictates this. Legal immigrants are welcome to come here, but illegals are harming our health care system.

[OneBadMother]

"Illegals"? You're referring to them as if they're some sort of alien race. :P

I think that some people might not become legal residents because a) our current immigration offices are full of so much red tape they seem to be specifically designed to discourage legal immigration, and/or b) they're afraid of getting shipped back to the place they just escaped.

There are probably a variety of reasons why they might not learn English, or rather not enough to communicate very fluently, which is more likely the case. Older generations especially seem to have a more difficult time, so they learn enough English to get by or live in communities where they have an easier time communicating and their children, raised in the States, become more and more fluent as time goes by, while still speaking let's say Spanish at home. Plus, where would they find the means for education? Spend money on language lessons instead of food and shelter? At any rate, it's not like this is a new phenomenon. It's been going on for at least 150 years.

[Henry]

I think that some people might not become legal residents because a) our current immigration offices are full of so much red tape they seem to be specifically designed to discourage legal immigration, and/or b) they're afraid of getting shipped back to the place they just escaped.

Well I agree.

But let's think critically about reason "b" and why said country is such a shithole, and also about the benefits from allowing a greater diversity (true diversity, not just diversity in the "not white" sense) of culture, ideology, and race in our immigrants.

It's been going on for at least 150 years.

At a much slower pace than its been going for the past 20 and especially 10 years. The offical stats say 10 million, which I think everyone knows is not accurate.

[Rick]

The only people who come into a country and do not feel a need to learn the language are those who are invading that country.

[Meyer]

I think if people are moving to a new country, essentially a system, they are responsible for determining and doing what is necessary to get what they want out of it.

[Hdier]

(that's just my cynical side showing).

I like your cynical side...it speaks the truth.

On topic, I think that immagrents should have to learn to speak the language of the country that they immigrate to. I'm just saying that they have to know enough for day-in day-out stuff, not even on the level of, say, a High School freshman. Furthermore, I do not believe that they need to read and write the language, just speak.

* Hdier added to this post, 4 minutes and 3 seconds later...

The only people who come into a country and do not feel a need to learn the language are those who are invading that country.

Good! By that philosophy, because we invaded originally, the fact that we didn't learn the native language can't be used against us.

I think that that whole argument is BS, because that was a long time ago when our species was not as advanced as it is today. Plus, if something was done wrong in the past, how does that excuse the same wrong now? I thought that we were supposed to be logical and rational. :(

[Rick]

Good! By that philosophy, when we originally arrived at America, we invaded.(

You kind of lost me here. I did not make this statement. Was it from someone else's post? It doesn't seem to fit in with the following statements.

[Hdier]

No, I was saying that your statement supported my argument, and was not trying to imply that you were making that argument. Sorry for the confusion.

[xanodel]

Back to the original topic. I don't think there is any real way for us to stop illegal immigration, short of creating a utopian world where every country is financially well off, creates jobs for everyone etc etc.

I'll also confess that I'm technically studying in the US on a visa, I absolutely loathe the visa approval lanes. Most of the countries that provide immigrants to the US have very stringent rules. As a student, I've seen around 300 people rejected before they admit one in; I've also seen cases where even letters from university presidents don't suffice. When I was in switzerland, and had to get my visa reapproved to get back to my classes here in the US, that was the first time I spent over 50 dollars on a phone call-that was just for calling, not for event talking to an official to reach an appointment date. The fee for seeing an official and the application fee itself varies by country; in some poorer third world countries (where most of our immigrants actually come from these days)the fees might actually be higher than in some european countries. For most of the people who were illegal immigrants to begin with, they can't pay the fee in the first place. Take a family friend for example-his wife was denied because the immigrant officer did not believe they were really married, even with a marriage certificate. Technically the only reason an immigration official needs to deny you a chance to set foot in the US is arbitrary-they just need to find some area where they think you're lying. Last but not least is the ardous process which also varies by country, and actually changes frequently enough to give you a headache. I'll just use China since I actually know how the system is (or was, could have changed by now, again). You first have to call a central embassy with a very high fee (something like 15 bucks a minute) who then takes your name, who takes your name etc, they'll call you back if they decide to give you an appointment to see an officer. I've also been told several times not to go back to see my relatives because immigration officials at universities sometimes don't even know how the rules are changing. Within just the process itself, I can see why many people choose an illegal immigration path, especially if they're desperate.

Two is the issue of asylum and refugees. Except in the cases of war, we actually require in most cases that the refugee/asylum seeker actually be on US soil-so yes, that itself right there could promote illegal immigration. And in case you're wondering, US is probably one of the most refugee-unfriendly developed countries in the world. We tend to treat them like criminals, and I'll refrain from going into dissertation about the lack of uniformity of US refugee laws (just finished a 11 page memo on a related topic).

Third is what I believe to be a frequent misconception of illegal immigrants. Actually I had the chance to visit a labor union that tries to defend the rights of illegal workers in the US and provide services to them (such as bank loans, english training etc). Mostly, the so called illegal immigrants we see on TV are actually illegal temporary workers who migrate across borders. Usually they come here to the US to work during harvesting season (the majority of illegals are in the agricultural work fields), leave during non-harvesting season back to their families and then come back. There is a minority that really do stay, but most of the illegal workers coming here don't drag there entire family across the border, which would prompt them to establish residency or domicile in the US.

The larger problem I see is that we aren't promoting solutions, not because it's impossible, but because Congress is lazy. As I mentioned above, the largest sector is in agriculture, and actually that is one labor area where US law itself is incredibly lax (generally no worker rights at all, even if you are legal), which says something about US law itself. To mention illegal immigrants, or better put illegal workers, would be to offend the large and powerful agricultural sector. Name a politician who wants to lose his funds? Anyone? *Didn't think so*

The issue of illegal immigration and even english is being promoted politically as a national identity issue-it's not. In the broadest sense, it's a labor rights issue, because to address the rights of immigrants here would require addressing the larger issue of labor rights for temporary agricultural contract workers (which includes children btw), some of which might go against the grain of larger human rights. And on the issue of english, I think they should learn, but I'll ask the question, if you're a laborer from Mexico who only speaks spanish, and is required to work 18 hours a day, not required to speak english (as is frequently the case), what is your incentive to learn english? Especially if you're here only on a work related temporary basis? It's technically a reform of labor laws in that sector and broadening grassroots organizations that reach out to the workers. And a substantial portion of the farm owners don't want that, and even threaten workers from joining organizations that may demand labor rights, human rights etc. I think anyone who wants to portray illegal immigration as a them versus us national identity crisis needs to read more.

On a final note, of a purely legal issue, an immigrant is a person who enters a country and seeks permanent residency there. Or rather, domicile. Even when applying for visa, there are two categories, one for actual immigration seeking applicants, and one for temporary visas. Guess which one is more stringent? Legally, most of the "illegal immigrants" we're talking about nationally aren't even immigrants in the strictest sense, but temporary contract workers (minus the contract and rights).

[The Rose]

Thanks for sharing from your perspective and study.

My concern is illegal aliens who cost us money to live here by being a tax burden.
What do you know about that?

[xanodel]

Again, the so called illegal aliens I will say, are for the majority, temporary workers who rarely glean any long term benefits out of the US social system.

The irony when people mention tax burden due to illegals is in my view also misguided. Technically they don't qualify for any of the benefits such as medicare, social welfare etc due for immigrants, or aliens ( I'm here legally and I don't qualify until I become a permanent resident), so regarding social benefits such as education, hospitals etc, they have to pay out of pocket. The so called social burden created by aliens is not in the financial sense, but in the sense that many US residents might run into them in either fields, and the fear that they will clog up the system.

Such an assumption is in fact, slightly unfair. As temporary workers, most of the aliens don't actually dare set foot into a hospital, since a hospital is fully capable of checking records etc and denying service if the person is an illegal alien (many actually are found that way), and worst is perhaps the hospital has the right to report the alien for deportation-it is compassion and mercy alone in many cases that save them from reporting or deportation. Education is another rather interesting field, since many do not drag their entire families across borders. Hence why I think most of the arguments about social burdens caused by illegals are misconstrued.

If I had to argue, I would instead argue an "inverse burden" on the illegal aliens. They gain few if any of the rights (heck, they rarely do even if they're here legally, at least I don't) while financially they still have to pay taxes. Perhaps not taxes in the sense of income tax, but they still have to pay sales taxes since they do buy consumer goods, such as food. If they send their children to school, they have to pay books, and if college, they never do qualify for any financial aid so again, out of pocket. Which is why I think it's time we do give them some rights-we in the majority are benefiting off of their labor.

[rwyatt365]

You kind of lost me here. I did not make this statement. Was it from someone else's post? It doesn't seem to fit in with the following statements.
Rick, I think that Hdier accurately quoted your post and interpreted it as saying that only an invader comes to a country with no intent of learning the "native" language – much as European settlers came to America with little, or no intent of learning Native American languages.

[Hdier]

Actually, I just reread my post and realized that I had mistyped. I edited it, but what I was trying to say was that because we originally invaded America the argument that new immigrants don't have to learn American either doesn't work because they're not invading. Therefore that argument would be nulled. If they were invading, I'd have another set of complaints all together.

Sorry, my bad.

[xanodel]

I should modify to say that the hospital has the right to notify law authorities, not that they could report illegal aliens for deportation, since a hospital has the right to notify authorities in cases where not doing so may violate the law or create danger.

[danalaina]

Education is another rather interesting field, since many do not drag their entire families across borders. Hence why I think most of the arguments about social burdens caused by illegals are misconstrued.

let me preface this by saying that i think the US should have open borders, lest y'all think i'm an immigrant-hatin' freak. i'm certainly no expert in this field...i've just picked some things up while working with teachers.

immigrants (legal or otherwise) are negatively impacting the educational system right now, at least in Southern California. i've worked with primary and secondary teachers quite a bit, and they're having a really hard time with ESL students slowing down regular classes. granted, public schools are facing a lot of problems with crowding and lack of resources already, but the language barrier is limiting what teachers can get across, meaning that English speaking kids are not getting the education that we expect them to have.

in this system, everybody loses. there's got to be a better way.

[The Rose]

let me preface this by saying that i think the US should have open borders, lest y'all think i'm an immigrant-hatin' freak. i'm certainly no expert in this field...i've just picked some things up while working with teachers.

immigrants (legal or otherwise) are negatively impacting the educational system right now, at least in Southern California. i've worked with primary and secondary teachers quite a bit, and they're having a really hard time with ESL students slowing down regular classes. granted, public schools are facing a lot of problems with crowding and lack of resources already, but the language barrier is limiting what teachers can get across, meaning that English speaking kids are not getting the education that we expect them to have.

in this system, everybody loses. there's got to be a better way.I have always resented the dumbing down of class for the slowest students. I learned to feel that way in elementary school. Why should the smart students be limited as to what they can learn by the slow or disruptive students?

That's why a private tutor is so much better than a classroom. You can learn at your own pace - whether that's fast or slow.

[xanodel]

I think the issue of ESL itself points to the necessity of an entire education system reform, rather than just immigration alone. Even if we don't allow non-english speaking students into normal classes, normal classes themselves still get dumbed down because as Rose pointed out, we slow down for the dumber students.

I did go through ESL classes when I first moved here to the US, and I think the possible solution would be to increase the number of ESL teachers overall, and encourage both english speaking and non-english speaking students who have language barriers or communication barriers to enroll in those classes, specifically for english related classes (like reading or other reading intensive classes). That's not a perfect solution, granted, but unless we change the entire system itself and where our focus is, I doubt it will change much.

[Hdier]

Yeah, I hate being the best student in the class, because I get everything the first day we go over it, and have to wait the rest of the week while we continue to look at it. It has become very annoying.

[Bossy Mom]

"Illegals"? You're referring to them as if they're some sort of alien race. :P


If I moved to Mexico and tried to get a job there without the proper documents, I would also be an "illegal."

[Bonnie]

Frankly, I think the Americans should learn to speak English before they start getting anyone else to. No offence, across-the-pond people, but really - must you put a Z in everything?

[Lucid]

Frankly, I think the Americans should learn to speak English before they start getting anyone else to. No offence, across-the-pond people, but really - must you put a Z in everything?

Yes we must.
The thing about languages is that they evolve. It's actually kind of interesting (in my opinion) that the various English speaking nations of the world each have their own version of the language.

[Rei]

I had a conversation with a Caucasian friend a while ago relating to this That pretty much sums up my views on this topic.

It started as a something about her going to an Asian mall in Toronto (because we're taking over the place), and not trying any clothes on because she felt very 'white'. And I replied that that's how I felt when I walk into a lecture hall.

The conversation that ensued:
J:
touche :P
my home town used to be /so/ white bred (you could count the number of black kids at one elementary school on one hand) but now all the people from Scarborough are moving into the cheap houses in north so it's getting much more diverse, but the gangs are coming over too so it's getting pretty bad in certain places.

Me:
Yeah, Scarborough is overrun... that's why we moved...
I was just counting with my house mate (she went to my highschool in Scarborough) the number of white kids in my elementary graduating class... and I seriously couldn't think of any more than 5. That is just scary =/

J:
lol wow
my parents are so threatened by that. They both grew up in scarborough when /it/ was the little white-bred town, and now they're like "when we walk down the street we're a minority!" but I don't get why thats so horrifying...demographics change *shrugs*
I like it in a way cuz I get to see what it's like :P
so many people used to live/live in that sort of env. that it's nice to get some perspective.

Me:
Diversity is all great...
I just think it's a little scary when you get a 80% Asian (Chinese) population going on. It's almost like a mini China. It's just 'wrong' when I walk down a street in Canada, and I can forget that I'm in Canada (minus the snow etc etc)
The problem with having a mini China in Canada...
is that it doesn't force the new immigrants to become Canadian. They don't try to blend into the Canadian way of life since there's so many of /them/ and they all live the same way. Being a majority of the population they could get the government to make accommodations for a lot of things and then deviating even more from the rest of Canada. These things make conditions unstable.

J:
well yeah, thats not diversity anymore :P
yeah it does bother me when people have been living here for years and still don't speak a word of English/French...I mean in theory you shouldn't be able to function like that, but depending on the neighborhood it doesn't matter. Everyone around you speaks some form of chinese (or insert language here) and all the street signs/advertisements/etc. are also in one or more languages, so why bother?
There should probably be some sort of cultural lines drawn, but picking where to put them would be so hard...

Me:
I think people shouldn't expect to be able to do things they way they did back in their country of origin (except for things inside the house like cooking and decor etc). If you liked the way things were back there, then why did you move here? O___o
Point is... all things in moderation...
___________________________________________

Frankly, not learning English is just plain lazy indifference. It's not as hard to learn as Chinese or even French. Watching some English TV and going grochery shopping at stores that don't speak your mother language is probably sufficient to pick up some of it.
(Note: I'm a first generation immigrant. I went to ESL for 3 months and learned sufficient English to continue the learning on my own.)

[xanodel]

Well, there are lines drawn between ethnic enclaves and ghettos in sociology, but I don't know enough about the theories to really stress it out.

What does bother me about ethnic groups becoming over-entrenched in a region is the problem aptly demonstrated by the riots in Paris back in 2005. The problem stemmed not from first generation immigrants, but second and third generations, due to issues of discrimination. So when I see something like you posted Rei, my question is why, and if systemic discrimination exists. And I think in this case, it's really easy to fall into a mental trap of "I could do it, why couldn't they?" because not everyone finds it so easy to move on and adapt. People immigrate for more practical reasons, like job availibility, safety, security etc, usually the "liking" of a culture doesn't matter too much (for example refugees who get passed from country to country), and while overtime there should be some degree of integration into the mainstream culture, why a second or third generation isn't integrating does beg a different question than just laziness. Hint, the Paris suburban riots, and a cartoon I recall seeing in Geneva where a fat bourgeois old french man and his wife sit at a cafe drinking coffee and reading newspapers, "Those immigrants should be grateful to breath our air." Hrmm, I should find it....

[Rei]

Well, there are lines drawn between ethnic enclaves and ghettos in sociology, but I don't know enough about the theories to really stress it out.

What does bother me about ethnic groups becoming over-entrenched in a region is the problem aptly demonstrated by the riots in Paris back in 2005. The problem stemmed not from first generation immigrants, but second and third generations, due to issues of discrimination. So when I see something like you posted Rei, my question is why, and if systemic discrimination exists. And I think in this case, it's really easy to fall into a mental trap of "I could do it, why couldn't they?" because not everyone finds it so easy to move on and adapt. People immigrate for more practical reasons, like job availibility, safety, security etc, usually the "liking" of a culture doesn't matter too much (for example refugees who get passed from country to country), and while overtime there should be some degree of integration into the mainstream culture, why a second or third generation isn't integrating does beg a different question than just laziness. Hint, the Paris suburban riots, and a cartoon I recall seeing in Geneva where a fat bourgeois old french man and his wife sit at a cafe drinking coffee and reading newspapers, "Those immigrants should be grateful to breath our air." Hrmm, I should find it....

I'm not saying discrimination doesn't exist and problems don't come up if people learn English.
I just think it's a serious problem when people don't learn English in an English-speaking country. I mean, if you are elderly and you moved here with a family, then sure it's okay. (I mean, my grandparents were in their 60's and they went to English classes). But if you are of working age, you should learn the language. If you want the benefits this country give, you have to give up something of your past and of your culture. You have to work at doing things the way the 'host' country does it.

[xanodel]

I'm far from saying that they shouldn't, or that they don't need to. Practically speaking they should, but again not everyone is driven by practical concerns, nor does everyone adapt easily, and there's probably some degree of emotional comfort in staying in an ethnic enclave.

I think there's a bit of a vicious cycle that is present too. If you learn english, or whatever the native tongue is, get discriminated, get low paying jobs (especially if you could have stayed in your ethnic enclave area and got the same job without having to learn the native tongue), there's less incentive practically to learn. Hence it creates a vicious cycle. Especially if actual formal environments for learning the native tongue of the new country is hard to reach. While grocery shopping, TV etc works for some individuals, it doesn't always. If we're talking in the direction of illegal immigrants, most the time the work they do is considered undergound, and the working hours are insane-I sincerely doubt they have much time on their hands to learn a new language. If anything, I wonder if there's sometimes a disincentive to learn a new language-while visiting the one labor center for immigrant workers from Mexico, the general impression was that employers did not want their workers to know english, because then they could raise certain questions politically.

[Rei]

First of all I would like to note that this thread discusses whether an immigrant should learn English or not; whether they can or not is not he issue. And that I am indicating my view that one should (try to) learn English, whether they are capable or not is - like I said - another issue.

Now...
While I understand the frustration of such a vicious cycle, I think learning the language can only help. Being unable to communicate and stand up for yourself on the common ground of something as basic as language is probably the greatest disadvantage you have, and most important thing to overcome. Something in common can only bring two peoples closer. (And IMO, nothing says, "I deserve to be here" like pwning a Caucasian's English. :p No offence.)

My views are directed toward the general immigrant. The illegal immigrant... well... they shouldn't be here in the first place. But I think this is not a matter of the individual as much as it is the government not handling certain problems well enough. First of all, not educating their citizens enough about racial equity and also not keeping a close enough eye on illegal immigrants and underground laborers.

Mind you I'm not being cold and heartless and saying people shouldn't have a chance to try to earn a better life. But there is a reason why they are not allowed in the country. In order to keep the standard of the country up. If anything, we should send aid to other countries instead of letting them in.

[xanodel]

If you're arguing that an immigrant should learn english or the native tongue of the new place for practical reasons, then yes, I would agree. However, besides the practical reasons, what other reasons are there? Why is it so necessary for them to speak the "right" language around the us, even though in reality, they probably don't speak it that often? Sometimes it just sounds like an ego trip for a majority culture.

I suppose there isn't such a problem in Canada, but if you're a country of immigrants like the US, what is the majority culture? Is it pop culture? Is it anglo saxon? Even if caucasians only account for around 60% of the population? Furthermore, what is a culture? Why is shared language so essential if culture can be embodied in other ways? When does the drive for political integration lead to cultural integration and then cultural oppression? What strikes me sometimes, is the similarity to a policy colonial france used on its african colonies. If a person who is natively african in origin adopts to the french system, speaks the language fluently, the person can rise into the ranks of french society, yet would never be considered a full frenchmen. It's a bit of body snatching if you will. Another policy to further integration was one used by Australia, where they separated aboriginal children from their families and sent them to live with caucasians. In both cases, problems ensued, besides the basic human rights problems, since both cases necessitated that the person fully disown their root culture and cultural identity for practical benefits.

Also, while I agree that a full system problem is the root cause, I have a bit of trouble reconciling with the idea of "keeping the country up." It's a vague concept and I think too often, it gets abused for less than ideal reasons.

[Hdier]

Shared languages are important so that we can do a thing called 'communicating'. Like we're doing right now.

[Rei]

If you're arguing that an immigrant should learn english or the native tongue of the new place for practical reasons, then yes, I would agree. However, besides the practical reasons, what other reasons are there? Why is it so necessary for them to speak the "right" language around the us, even though in reality, they probably don't speak it that often? Sometimes it just sounds like an ego trip for a majority culture...

I haven't had the time to read the rest of the reply yet (sorry).
But a simple answer to that first bit is respect. If you watched the movie "Love Actually" there was a segment where a couple didn't really speak each other's language. When they parted, they each went to learn the other's language. The man went propose to the woman in the woman's language, and the woman replied in his.

Maybe I'm just being touchy-feely, but I think one should respect the country they live in, and put in the effort.

[xanodel]

Nah, I agree it's a sign of respect, and it does alleviate some concerns. But I think that in many cases, as stated in the OP and in some of the comments here, it gets blown out of proportion into a national identity crisis (which is happening in the US). It doesn't need to be if we dig deeper and consider the origin of what we define as "culture." Essentially, culture does not deal with the political national identity (or state nationalism in political science terms), and cultural identity (or cultural nationalism) can stay intact even with the addition of foreigners.

I guess I just wanted people to think about the origins of our statements of "foreigners who come here better speak our language" and the broader implications, which sometimes did not start from a practical standpoint but end up having broader practical impacts (say cultural desolation or destruction). That's all. No offense intended. n_n

~xanodel

[Rei]

You're right, learning the language is definitely not going to solve everything and it's ridiculous to blame problems on it alone.

As long as an effort is made toward it, it is alright. I'm just talking about the people who don't even bother.

But ditto, no offense intended.

[Booko]

Thanks for sharing from your perspective and study.

My concern is illegal aliens who cost us money to live here by being a tax burden.
What do you know about that?

I know a great deal about it, because of where I live in Atlanta. I've seen firsthand the difficulties those who are here illegally face and I've seen what it does to local services like schools and medical services.

I tend to view the issue more from the pov that our immigration system needs a total overhaul and unless we do that everything else is just bandaids on a patient with a severed femoral artery.

I do think there's a middle way where we don't have to "just say yes" to illegal immigration or "just deport them all" but in the usual public rhetoric, just as in other hot-button issues, that middle way tends to be shouted down into oblivion.

I personally am for lots and lots of legal immigration, because I selfishly want there to be some population around working to pay my social security benefits. :D

Also please don't forget there's a grey area between "legal" and "illegal" immigration. There are people who are here via perfectly legal means, but because INS has lost their paperwork or some lawyer made a mistake on a form, they are technically "illegal" but their intention was always to be here legally, and that should be something we very much take into account. The number of people here with this sort of "illegal" status is not so insignificant that it should be ignored.





Booko added to this post, 15 minutes and 45 seconds later...

If you're arguing that an immigrant should learn english or the native tongue of the new place for practical reasons, then yes, I would agree. However, besides the practical reasons, what other reasons are there? Why is it so necessary for them to speak the "right" language around the us, even though in reality, they probably don't speak it that often? Sometimes it just sounds like an ego trip for a majority culture.

It's often phrased in an arrogant fashion, but I wouldn't assume the intent behind it is arrogant. Heck, none of my grandparents spoke English when they came to this country a century ago. The thing is, when they got here they assumed they would have to learn English and that no one was expected to learn their language to "help" them get along.

I suspect that's where some of the resentment comes in.

I suppose there isn't such a problem in Canada, but if you're a country of immigrants like the US, what is the majority culture? Is it pop culture? Is it anglo saxon?


It's an English-speaking culture and has been for centuries. Unlike Canada, we never had a non-English-speaking culture of any note that persisted. (No, I'm not ignoring the millenia of Native American culture that preceded this one, but it's not relevant to what exists today.)

If I moved to France, I would expect to have to learn French. I don't expect anyone would learn English so they could instruct me at my job or at the polling place.

Why is shared language so essential if culture can be embodied in other ways?


A shared language is essential because unity is impossible without the means of communication. It's to that end that I support the eventual adoption of some universal *auxiliary* language worldwide, as that can only assist us finding better ways of getting along with our neighbors beyond blowing them up. (Helps business a lot too.)

When does the drive for political integration lead to cultural integration and then cultural oppression? What strikes me sometimes, is the similarity to a policy colonial france used on its african colonies. If a person who is natively african in origin adopts to the french system, speaks the language fluently, the person can rise into the ranks of french society, yet would never be considered a full frenchmen. It's a bit of body snatching if you will. Another policy to further integration was one used by Australia, where they separated aboriginal children from their families and sent them to live with caucasians. In both cases, problems ensued, besides the basic human rights problems, since both cases necessitated that the person fully disown their root culture and cultural identity for practical benefits.

All of which has nothing to do with what's currently going on in the U.S., since we're not in someone else's country trying to "remake" it in our image. WEll, not on our own soil anyway. I'll leave current foreign policy out of this discussion. :irked:

I would also note there is a great imbalance when it comes to languages we are "expected" to assist in this country and ones that get totally ignored. For some reason I'm expected to learn one specific language in order to communicate with gardeners and landscapers, but if you're from Africa or Estonia, tough toenails for you. You're expected to learn English they way previous immigrants had to.

Even screaming liberals have been known to be upset by this sorry state of affairs.

[Rei]

I suppose there isn't such a problem in Canada, but if you're a country of immigrants like the US, what is the majority culture? Is it pop culture? Is it anglo saxon? Even if caucasians only account for around 60% of the population....

Actually, Canada is just as much a country of immigrants as the US is. Canada is also less bitter about racial differences (for the most part) than the US is. What is the culture in a country of immigrants? Firstly, multiculturalism - mutual respect of other cultures. Secondly, the country's collective goal. every country has it's own identity PAST race and country of origin of their immigrants, the bigger picture. Traditions of the country, national holidays and how they're celebrated.

I agree with Booko in terms of where the resentment is coming from. I don't think anyone should come to a new country expecting to be helped out. My family came expecting difficulty, expecting to have to learn a new way of life, expecting to have to speak the language.

I think if new immigrants start to get so much help that they don't even have to learn the language, they start to get arrogant themselves. (In fact, I see it happening right now.) And that is what I think is horrifying: to move to a new country, not respecting the culture, and being proud of it.

[INTroJect]

This subject is definately not worth getting heated over. Its well known and understood that by the third generation all the descendants are speaking English and most have forgotton the language that they came with. My mom came from Cuba at the age of 12 and learned Eng because she came at an early age. And the English proponents are going to love this one: I have aunts and uncles who have been here for 40 years who still barely speak english, they hate it. But they all came here later in life. ALL of the 2nd and 3rd generation children, even in Miami, speak English. So what's the big deal? After a couple of years the end result is the same: English.

The only reason that illegal immigrants are classified as illegal is because in the 1980's we passed a law that said that immigrants had to ask first and then the whole thing grew from there to the craziness that it is today. Take away the law and then they are no longer illegal immigrants.

I work at a company with a lot of Indians. I have come across a dozen different languages. They all still speak english to each other. Duh. So we get a buncha Cubexicans here in the USA, maybe there will be pockets where Spanish will be prevalent, heck, there already is. But then I grew up in a small town in PA and there are still people speaking Pennsylvania Dutch but the wave of immigration that caused it is history and all 2 of them left speaking it will be gone too.

Sooner or later this Mexican wave is going to end. It may look permanent but its not. Ive been to Mexico a couple of times and, suprise-suprise, most of them really do not care to come to the USA. If they can make a life there they are quite happy to do so. To them the USA just a place to go to make more money but the culture and daily life is empty and depressing. Its equivalent to the wave of Americans working for the government contractors in Iraq. Indians are the same way, they would rather be in India around family, friends and everything that is familiar.

[Danisty]

It is a difficult language to master, but it's not, as you say, the hardest language. Russian, Finnish, Chinese and many others are actually much more difficult.Actually, I'm just starting to learn Russian and I haven't found it that difficult so far. The alphabet was easy enough to learn and looking ahead at what I will be learning, it seems like the rules of grammar are followed a lot more strictly than with English. I think it says something also that Russia is nearly 100% literate, but that probably has more to do with education than the difficulty of the language.

I personally am for lots and lots of legal immigration, because I selfishly want there to be some population around working to pay my social security benefits. :DI'm for lots and lots of legal immigration because diversity is fun.

I suspect that's where some of the resentment comes in.

If I moved to France, I would expect to have to learn French. I don't expect anyone would learn English so they could instruct me at my job or at the polling place. Yup, that just about sums it up for me.

I would also note there is a great imbalance when it comes to languages we are "expected" to assist in this country and ones that get totally ignored. For some reason I'm expected to learn one specific language in order to communicate with gardeners and landscapers, but if you're from Africa or Estonia, tough toenails for you. You're expected to learn English they way previous immigrants had to.It certainly doesn't make any sense for me to learn every possible language that immigrants to this country come here with when they can all learn one language.

[Henry]

This subject is definately not worth getting heated over. Its well known and understood that by the third generation all the descendants are speaking English and most have forgotton the language that they came with. My mom came from Cuba at the age of 12 and learned Eng because she came at an early age. And the English proponents are going to love this one: I have aunts and uncles who have been here for 40 years who still barely speak english, they hate it. But they all came here later in life. ALL of the 2nd and 3rd generation children, even in Miami, speak English. So what's the big deal? After a couple of years the end result is the same: English.

The big deal is that the individuals who are here illegally and who do not bother to speak English are a cultural blight, expensive to work with and educate, and have, in conjunction with PC obsessed liberals and bible-beating morons, killed what little sense of community we moderns had.

The only reason that illegal immigrants are classified as illegal is because in the 1980's we passed a law that said that immigrants had to ask first and then the whole thing grew from there to the craziness that it is today. Take away the law and then they are no longer illegal immigrants.So just take away the law and its not corruption. Take away the law and its not fraud. Take away the law and its not rape.

I work at a company with a lot of Indians. I have come across a dozen different languages. They all still speak english to each other. Duh. So we get a buncha Cubexicans here in the USA, maybe there will be pockets where Spanish will be prevalent, heck, there already is. But then I grew up in a small town in PA and there are still people speaking Pennsylvania Dutch but the wave of immigration that caused it is history and all 2 of them left speaking it will be gone too.I too live with many Indians, and they're not a social blight. They almost all know the language. They generally raise their kids and take education seriously. They typically bring valuable, high value-added skills to the workforce. They normally behave civilly and make good neighbors. And, most importantly, their presence here is not belie a fundamental disrespect for our country's citizens.

Sooner or later this Mexican wave is going to end. It may look permanent but its not. Ive been to Mexico a couple of times and, suprise-suprise, most of them really do not care to come to the USA. If they can make a life there they are quite happy to do so. To them the USA just a place to go to make more money but the culture and daily life is empty and depressing. Its equivalent to the wave of Americans working for the government contractors in Iraq. Indians are the same way, they would rather be in India around family, friends and everything that is familiar.I hope you are right. However, I'm skeptical, as the more that come here, the lower the cultural barriers will be, and Mexican wages are not growing at global standards because, despite the fact that Asia has shown how very quick and easy it is, they can't get their macroeconomic shit together.

Lets have immigration from a variety of ethnicities. Let's have it come from a variety of backgrounds and skillsets. Lets have it come from poor people of many countries.

[INTroJect]

'The big deal is that the individuals who are here illegally and who do not bother to speak English are a cultural blight, expensive to work with and educate, and have, in conjunction with PC obsessed liberals and bible-beating morons, killed what little sense of community we moderns had.'

Take a look at the fast lane of the nearest highway (assuming you live within a days travel of one), most of the time every single car in the fast lane is breaking the law. Are you saying that you have never driven faster than the regulated speed limit? You never wore white shoes before Memorial Day? We are all lawbreakers in some form or another. But that is the fun of a Democracy because we are allowed to make and break our own laws to our own detriment. So much easier to say that a kettle is black when ye are black thyself.


'I hope you are right. However, I'm skeptical, as the more that come here, the lower the cultural barriers will be, and Mexican wages are not growing at global standards because, despite the fact that Asia has shown how very quick and easy it is, they can't get their macroeconomic shit together.'

-Macroeconomic numbers are just numbers. They are important but they are only a back-end view of what is going on in the front-end. This "macroeconomic shit together" is never going to happen. They generally like to have a job, take a wage, and spend their free time being with their family (maybe we should learn some things from them). There is less of a desire to scale the social ladder. This may seem less-than-ideal, however, a closer look at the situation will show that they serve towards the same purpose in the common good as your Indian immigrant role models, only in a different way. Have you been to your local car wash? Do you need your house cleaned? Do you ever eat food? There mere fact that they are here working those jobs cheaply and efficiently is proof enough of their worth in our economy. It is self-evident that the best interest of the employer is to only hire the best person/people for a job. What business is it of ours to get in the way of such a natural transaction of benefit/benefit for all parties involved? My condolences if you are reading this after getting the news that a Mexican was hired to take your place at the local tomato farm.

[Lucid]

This coming from the holder of the 'I don't want to be a product of my environment, I want my environment to be a product of me.' quote. Take a look at the fast lane of the nearest highway (assuming you live within a days travel of one), most of the time every single car in the fast lane is breaking the law. Are you saying that you have never driven faster than the regulated speed limit? You never wore white shoes before Memorial Day? We are all lawbreakers in some form or another. But that is the fun of a Democracy because we are allowed to make and break our own laws to our own detriment. So much easier to say that a kettle is black when ye are black thyself. Asinine reply.

I'd say there's a huge difference between driving over the speed limit and being in a country illegally. Your argument that it's only wrong if you get caught doesn't hold any water.
Also, wearing white shoes before Memorial Day isn't a law... so I have no idea why you brought that up. And I think most people are talking about all illegal immigrants, not just Mexicans. The fact that you seem to only care about one nationality of the hundreds who are here illegally is quite telling.
But to respond to your point about citizens breaking the law by speeding: Yes. Many of us do. And when we are caught we must pay the fines and go to court and possibly lose our driving privileges. You (and many people) seem to be arguing that people here illegally shouldn't have to face the consequences of their law-breaking activities (deportation, not being able to get a job, etc).

My condolences if you are reading this after getting the news that a Mexican was hired to take your place at the local tomato farm.

The argument that illegals only take jobs that citizens don't want to do is, unfortunately, incorrect. Where I live, illegals are really screwing up the construction industry. They are taking jobs that working class citizens with minimal formal education need. To do drywall, for example, a citizen gets paid about $15 - $20 an hour. That's decent money. Illegals do the same job for less than half that. Which is bad both for the illegals, and for the citizens. In fact, the only group who benefits from illegal immigrants are the business owners. Other industries that are being negatively affected by illegals that citizens do want to do are restaurant work, landscaping, house keeping and cleaning and child care.


Have you been to your local car wash? Do you need your house cleaned? Do you ever eat food? There mere fact that they are here working those jobs cheaply and efficiently is proof enough of their worth in our economy. It is self-evident that the best interest of the employer is to only hire the best person/people for a job. What business is it of ours to get in the way of such a natural transaction of benefit/benefit for all parties involved?

You seem to think that these are all jobs that citizens don't need or don't want. You are incorrect. Unfortunately, we have problems with poverty in our country as well. And I'd rather see these jobs go to people who are here legally.

It is self-evident that the best interest of the employer is to only hire the best person/people for a job.

Actually, in the case of construction at least, the employer usually hires the cheapest labor. A certain amount of know-how is needed to do many construction related tasks (as I mentioned before, drywall, for example). Illegals will say they know how to do a job that they don't because they desperately need the work. This benefits no one.

There mere fact that they are here working those jobs cheaply and efficiently is proof enough of their worth in our economy.

But it's not benefiting our economy. It's really detrimental to our economy. The only people who benefit, as I stated before, are the people who are already rich.

You seem to be arguing that because of economic hardships in other countries, it's ok for the citizens of those places to completely disregard our laws and come here to bring economic hardship to our country by undercutting fair wages and taking jobs that citizens actually do want and do need. And it's acceptable for them to break the law in that way, because most citizens have, at one time or another, been guilty of speeding or wearing white shoes after Memorial Day. :rolleyes:

Your bias seems to be clouding your judgment and affecting your ability to think rationally.

[INTroJect]

I'd say there's a huge difference between driving over the speed limit and being in a country illegally. Your argument that it's only wrong if you get caught doesn't hold any water.
Also, wearing white shoes before Memorial Day isn't a law... so I have no idea why you brought that up. And I think most people are talking about all illegal immigrants, not just Mexicans. The fact that you seem to only care about one nationality of the hundreds who are here illegally is quite telling.
But to respond to your point about citizens breaking the law by speeding: Yes. Many of us do. And when we are caught we must pay the fines and go to court and possibly lose our driving privileges.

My argument is not that it is wrong if you get caught. My argument is that the law itself is silly and should not be there. It is the duty of a good citizen to make such a determination. If a law is unjust it damn well should be broken. It should be broken in the most flagrant manner possible.

You (and many people) seem to be arguing that people here illegally shouldn't have to face the consequences of their law-breaking activities (deportation, not being able to get a job, etc)

Everyone knows that the consequences are pretty much non-existant. Surely not enough to stop the flood. Thanks for another reason to just be done with the unfriendly laws. All that it is doing is alienating and slowing their integration. Go take a walk into the kitchen of your favorite eating establishment. The consequence of them not working there is you dont get to eat at your restaurant, certainly not with the good price and high quality and as often as you have come to expect. If you were to get what you wanted, deportation of all 20 million illegals I imagine, you would be starting a new thread in the forum asking why you can't seem to find good service at a restaurant.

To do drywall, for example, a citizen gets paid about $15 - $20 an hour. That's decent money. Illegals do the same job for less than half that. Which is bad both for the illegals, and for the citizens. In fact, the only group who benefits from illegal immigrants are the business owners. Other industries that are being negatively affected by illegals that citizens do want to do are restaurant work, landscaping, house keeping and cleaning and child care.

Ok. These citizens of yours want to do the job, but of course they want to show up and get paid a cushy $15 - $20 an hour for it. Must be nice. I would love to get to show up at my current job with twice the market rate for my labor. In fact, if I thought I could get it by whining a little I would probably give it a try. If a citizen can do the job as well as an immigrant then by all means he can stand with them and make $7 an hour. Or, that citizen can take advantage of the opportunities that are here in our country by going to school and getting an education.

Lets look into this labor cost reduction a little further. Lucid, put on your businessowner cap for a minute. If Mr. Lucid were running a construction company he would need to sell the best house at the best price, the other three construction companies in the town all have to play by the same rules of the game. Any of those construction companies who take advantage of a cost reduction will be allowed to sell a better/cheaper house, thus make more money. This may last for a day or two for the first construction company who discovers this cost reduction but eventually the other companies will follow suit. They are all still competing against each other to make the cheapest house at the best price so they all lower their home prices accordingly. If you don't follow the leaders eventually your business is gone, so you, Lucid, end up either having to take advantage of the cost reduction or close up shop and they take your business from you. The effect of the drop in cost gets 'trickled down' to the consumer, a TRUE trickle down effect. The actions of the businessowners competing against each other cancel out any benefit for themselves. Its only for their own self preservation. The winner is the consumer.


You seem to think that these are all jobs that citizens don't need or don't want. You are incorrect. Unfortunately, we have problems with poverty in our country as well. And I'd rather see these jobs go to people who are here legally.

Look around you. We are living in Capitalism. If you are unhappy with it maybe Cuba will take you.

You seem to be arguing that because of economic hardships in other countries, it's ok for the citizens of those places to completely disregard our laws and come here to bring economic hardship to our country by undercutting fair wages and taking jobs that citizens actually do want and do need. And it's acceptable for them to break the law in that way, because most citizens have, at one time or another, been guilty of speeding or wearing white shoes after Memorial Day. :rolleyes:

Your bias seems to be clouding your judgment and affecting your ability to think rationally.

Nice conclusion, you put some thought into ending it with a bang. However, overall, the point to my previous post was completely missed and, I dare say, somewhat contorted. Your misinformation of the fundamental laws of nature will disserve you in life with an equivalent porportion of amplitude.

[Henry]

-This coming from the holder of the 'I don't want to be a product of my environment, I want my environment to be a product of me.' quote. Take a look at the fast lane of the nearest highway (assuming you live within a days travel of one), most of the time every single car in the fast lane is breaking the law. Are you saying that you have never driven faster than the regulated speed limit? You never wore white shoes before Memorial Day? We are all lawbreakers in some form or another. But that is the fun of a Democracy because we are allowed to make and break our own laws to our own detriment. So much easier to say that a kettle is black when ye are black thyself. Asinine reply. I break meaningless laws, like the 55 or 65 mph speed limit. You can't argue that the horde of illegal immigration is having a net positive benefit on the US voting population, eg the ones who are supposed to be making political decisions in this country.

-Macroeconomic numbers are just numbers. They are important but they are only a back-end view of what is going on in the front-end.Total bullshit. Over the long term, savings=investment. Investment per worker is the ultimate determinant of output per worker. And guess what? No one is going to save domestically when the Mexican government, as they so frequently do, print money to finance absurd spending and low taxation policies.

Indeed, I agree about the Mexican government never getting a control of budget deficits and inflation. Its never going to happen. And you shoudln't enter into exchange with people who can't get a fundamental part of their lives together.

Plenty of poor countries have gotten theirs together, and there are plenty of examples of how painless things are. So that argument is out.

They generally like to have a job, take a wage, and spend their free time being with their family (maybe we should learn some things from them). There is less of a desire to scale the social ladder. This may seem less-than-ideal, however, a closer look at the situation will show that they serve towards the same purpose in the common good as your Indian immigrant role models, only in a different way. Have you been to your local car wash? Do you need your house cleaned? Do you ever eat food? There mere fact that they are here working those jobs cheaply and efficiently is proof enough of their worth in our economy. Null and void. The employee-employer relationship does not factor in "externalities" like increased housing costs, increased medical cost, crowded roads and schools, and cultural blight factors that the rest of us face as a result of the horde invasion.


It is self-evident that the best interest of the employer is to only hire the best person/people for a job. What business is it of ours to get in the way of such a natural transaction of benefit/benefit for all parties involved? My condolences if you are reading this after getting the news that a Mexican was hired to take your place at the local tomato farm.Namely the rights afforded to a citizen of the United States, ie to create laws to control immigration.

And you touch on one of the best arguments against illegal immigration: it exaccerbates (already unreasonable) inequalities of wealth and income.

[Henry]

My argument is not that it is wrong if you get caught. My argument is that the law itself is silly and should not be there. It is the duty of a good citizen to make such a determination.Lovely. Now its my "duty" to see your perspective.

Everyone knows that the consequences are pretty much non-existant. Surely not enough to stop the flood. Thanks for another reason to just be done with the unfriendly laws. All that it is doing is alienating and slowing their integration. Go take a walk into the kitchen of your favorite eating establishment. The consequence of them not working there is you dont get to eat at your restaurant, certainly not with the good price and high quality and as often as you have come to expect. If you were to get what you wanted, deportation of all 20 million illegals I imagine, you would be starting a new thread in the forum asking why you can't seem to find good service at a restaurant. Actually, no. There's a shortage of unskilled, US labor in bullshit jobs with bullshit employers who want to pay 6.25 for work where MPL is 20-40 per hour.

There's a very large reserve of workers, minorities over-represented among them, who lack skills and who would very likely be willing to do these jobs at 10-12 per hour. So basically, we kick the illegals out and finance kicking them out by confiscating whatever property they brought or aquired here, inflation ticks at 5% for a year as labor costs rise, traffic goes away, real housing costs plummet, schools get much less crowded, hospitals grow less crowded, and life basically gets better. Except I pay $8 for a happy meal instead of 7 and the kid behind the counter is a high school brat or moron, but at least they can communicate with me.

Ok. These citizens of yours want to do the job, but of course they want to show up and get paid a cushy $15 - $20 an hour for it. Must be nice. I would love to get to show up at my current job with twice the market rate for my labor. In fact, if I thought I could get it by whining a little I would probably give it a try. If a citizen can do the job as well as an immigrant then by all means he can stand with them and make $7 an hour. Except the hopes of illegals to break our laws in our country do not merit any consideration whatsoever. Make your own country better, don't squat in mine.

"I hope I shall live more comfortably in my neighbor's bed, with my neighbor's wife".


Or, that citizen can take advantage of the opportunities that are here in our country by going to school and getting an education. And of the 50% of the citizens here that are too stupid to graduate from college?

Lets look into this labor cost reduction a little further. Lucid, put on your businessowner cap for a minute. If Mr. Lucid were running a construction company he would need to sell the best house at the best price, the other three construction companies in the town all have to play by the same rules of the game. Any of those construction companies who take advantage of a cost reduction will be allowed to sell a better/cheaper house, thus make more money. This may last for a day or two for the first construction company who discovers this cost reduction but eventually the other companies will follow suit. They are all still competing against each other to make the cheapest house at the best price so they all lower their home prices accordingly. If you don't follow the leaders eventually your business is gone, so you, Lucid, end up either having to take advantage of the cost reduction or close up shop and they take your business from you. The effect of the drop in cost gets 'trickled down' to the consumer, a TRUE trickle down effect. The actions of the businessowners competing against each other cancel out any benefit for themselves. Its only for their own self preservation. The winner is the consumer.Really? Is that why corporate profits as a percentage of GDP are at all-time highs? Is that why the income disparities have those with MBAs making six figures and those who just finished high school making 6? Is that why GINI coeffecients are near the highest in the world? Is that why 400 people own about half America's wealth?

You are right re corporations only having concern for their own self-interests. It is, however, detrimental to society, just like, say, a factory belching black smoke into the air.


Look around you. We are living in Capitalism. If you are unhappy with it maybe Cuba will take you.We are living in Democracy. And in a democracy, citizens make the laws. Even if illegal immigrants do not like those laws.

If you are unhappy with it maybe Russia will take you.

[INTroJect]

I break meaningless laws, like the 55 or 65 mph speed limit. You can't argue that the horde of illegal immigration is having a net positive benefit on the US voting population, eg the ones who are supposed to be making political decisions in this country..

So...the laws that you break are meaningless? What about the increased statistic probability of murdering someone. Next time I see children crossing the street I will be thinking about people like you. Your actions as a lawless citizen are also polluting and increasing the cost of gasoline. Thanks for the $3 a gallon.



Total bullshit. Over the long term, savings=investment. Investment per worker is the ultimate determinant of output per worker. And guess what? No one is going to save domestically when the Mexican government, as they so frequently do, print money to finance absurd spending and low taxation policies

Indeed, I agree about the Mexican government never getting a control of budget deficits and inflation. Its never going to happen. And you shoudln't enter into exchange with people who can't get a fundamental part of their lives together.

Plenty of poor countries have gotten theirs together, and there are plenty of examples of how painless things are. So that argument is out.

Lets not get into a tirade of the spending habits of other governments. Last time I checked we had a deficit. In fact, a quick look at the US national debt clock shows: $9,153,192,666,941.49


Null and void. The employee-employer relationship does not factor in "externalities" like increased housing costs, increased medical cost, crowded roads and schools, and cultural blight factors that the rest of us face as a result of the horde invasion.

I am sure they had a similar sentiment for whichever hoarde invasion ultimately brought your existence.


Namely the rights afforded to a citizen of the United States, ie to create laws to control immigration.

And you touch on one of the best arguments against illegal immigration: it exaccerbates (already unreasonable) inequalities of wealth and income.

The inequalities of wealth and income exist because of the lazy/whiney connection previously discussed. Why is it that I am consistently getting rich? I don't even have to hire illegals.

[Henry]

So...the laws that you break are meaningless? What about the increased statistic probability of murdering someone. Next time I see children crossing the street I will be thinking about people like you. Your actions as a lawless citizen are also polluting and increasing the cost of gasoline. Thanks for the $3 a gallon.

OK, so driving fast increases consumption of gas by, what, 10% maybe, and deaths per accident per year by perhaps 1/100,000. Important stuff these speed limits. Ruining the lives of those who don't have college degrees? Bah, trivial by comparison.


Lets not get into a tirade of the spending habits of other governments. Last time I checked we had a deficit. In fact, a quick look at the US national debt clock shows: $9,153,192,666,941.49Ah yes, the classic "my argument is silly but I'll throw a meaningless, illogical diversion into the fray to deflect". Very nice.

Crux of argument was:

Mexico does not consistently control inflation. People will not invest in a country where there are wild swings in inflation. Investment is the key to a high standard of livng.

Your counter argument? We have a large public debt.

I am sure they had a similar sentiment for whichever hoarde invasion ultimately brought your existence. Who do you mean by "they"? The ethnic result of the Spanish conquest, enslavement, and rape of the native americans?

Mexico does not have any cultural entitlement to land outside of Mexico, including land they sold to us to bail themselves out of one of their many financial crises nor land they lost in wars they started.


The inequalities of wealth and income exist because of the lazy/whiney connection previously discussed. Why is it that I am consistently getting rich? I don't even have to hire illegals.You're getting rich because you have a reasonable level of education. Mexican immigration is propping up real wages for those with education and has dropped the real wages for unskilled labor to the floor.

And the poor are so because they're lazy and whiney.

[INTroJect]

Lovely. Now its my "duty" to see your perspective.

Nope. Its your duty to think. Not just assume that its correct because you saw it hyped up on FOX news.


Actually, no. There's a shortage of unskilled, US labor in bullshit jobs with bullshit employers who want to pay 6.25 for work where MPL is 20-40 per hour.

There's a very large reserve of workers, minorities over-represented among them, who lack skills and who would very likely be willing to do these jobs at 10-12 per hour. So basically, we kick the illegals out and finance kicking them out by confiscating whatever property they brought or aquired here, inflation ticks at 5% for a year as labor costs rise, traffic goes away, real housing costs plummet, schools get much less crowded, hospitals grow less crowded, and life basically gets better. Except I pay $8 for a happy meal instead of 7 and the kid behind the counter is a high school brat or moron, but at least they can communicate with me.

Great. Thanks. You kicked out the foreigners and turned us into Europe. You will find someone else to blame for our problems when our unemployment goes up to 15%. Removing the option of a large pool of cheap labor does not simply cause employers to just settle for more expensive labor, it either removes the product or service, makes it mroe expensive or causes it to shift somewhere else. You may get the white cashier at McDonalds that you desire but its not as easy as an $8 happy meal (have they gotten that expensive?), where will the tomatoes and lettuce come from? Certainly not American farmers because you just increased the cost that farmers have to charge for produce in order to stay in business. That example is just a tip of the iceberg, the effect will be much more broad than within the walls of our fast food restaurants.

Really? Is that why corporate profits as a percentage of GDP are at all-time highs? Is that why the income disparities have those with MBAs making six figures and those who just finished high school making 6? Is that why GINI coeffecients are near the highest in the world? Is that why 400 people own about half America's wealth?

You are right re corporations only having concern for their own self-interests. It is, however, detrimental to society, just like, say, a factory belching black smoke into the air.

I am willing to guess that the group of 400 is not a part of the lazy/whiney demographic previously discussed.

[Jezebel]

The debate in this thread has deteriorated to the point of thoroughly violating the forum rules. I don't have time to sort through the whole thing at the moment. Temporarily locked, pending cleanup.





Jezebel added to this post, 1165 minutes and 17 seconds later...

Reopening the thread. If you're posting inflammatory material to purposefully 'get a rise out of people', you are trolling. If you're responding to the material by 'insulting' the other member, you are still degrading the quality of the thread. Please try to continue this in a civil manner. Lets not turn the threads on this forum into petty namecalling exchanges in favor of rational debate.

[Lucid]

TheLoneINTJ:
I already stated my views on this subject in another thread. To save you the trouble of tracking it down, I'll repost it here:

Those who view it as a racial issue either want to build a wall on the US/Mexico border (which is ridiculous, IMO... how does that stop illegals from places other than Mexico?) or, on the other side of the argument, open the borders and allow illegals to work here for slave wages.

What's ironic about the latter view (and somewhat sad) is that it seeks to allow the exploitation of the very group of people who they are trying to support.

In my opinion, the best way to solve the illegal immigration issue is to fix our immigration and naturalization system, making legalization an achievable and affordable goal for those who want to stay, and making work visas easier to obtain for those who want to come here to work.

We do not live in a free market capitalist system. We have many measures in place to protect the rights and the quality of living of the workers, such as minimum wages, unions, labor laws, etc. Business owners are able to bypass these (somewhat more expensive, but IMO very important) measures by hiring people who have no legal recourse, no labor unions and paying them shit.
Paying everyone a fair wage does mean that we will pay more for things. I think paying a dollar or two more is worth the payment in human rights and dignity, not to mention the longer-term boost to our economy.

I think most people are fine with the idea of people immigrating here from other countries (since most of us are the descendants of immigrants ourselves), just as long as they do it legally.

To address some of your points:

Ok. These citizens of yours want to do the job, but of course they want to show up and get paid a cushy $15 - $20 an hour for it. Must be nice. I would love to get to show up at my current job with twice the market rate for my labor. In fact, if I thought I could get it by whining a little I would probably give it a try. If a citizen can do the job as well as an immigrant then by all means he can stand with them and make $7 an hour. Or, that citizen can take advantage of the opportunities that are here in our country by going to school and getting an education.

Where I live, $7 an hour isn't a living wage. It's pretty impossible to support yourself, much less a family, on $7 an hour. And most illegal immigrants don't even get paid minimum wage, which where I live is $5.75 an hour. Citizens are losing their jobs because people are exploiting an illegal workforce. This is bad for everyone, especially the illegals, who are not even being paid a living wage, let alone what their labor is actually worth.

I would love to get to show up at my current job with twice the market rate for my labor.

No, you're misinformed. $15-$20 has been the industry standard pay for most labor jobs (especially construction) in my area for years. Legal citizens get paid that amount. The $7 an hour is what illegals get if they're lucky. If they're unlucky, they get less than minimum wage. Also, I don't think you understand exactly what goes into working a construction job if you think it's worth $7 an hour. Teenagers get paid that to work at Best Buy. Before taxes, a person making $7 an hour grosses a whopping $280 a week.

Your misinformation of the fundamental laws of nature will disserve you in life with an equivalent porportion of amplitude.

No, it seems like you don't understand the economics involved here.
Many citizens here in the US can't go to college for economic reasons, just as I'm sure many illegal immigrants can't afford to go to college either. Also, in your vision of how things should be, it seems that all legal citizens would be educated and wealthy, while the illegals would be the cheap source of labor that the citizens can exploit by underpaying them, not compensating them for injuries sustained on the job, and making them work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. Remind me, which of us is on the side of the illegals?

Look around you. We are living in Capitalism. If you are unhappy with it maybe Cuba will take you.

We don't live in free market capitalism. As I already mentioned, we have many systems in place to ensure that workers get paid a fair wage. Illegals, because they have no legal recourse, don't have access to those systems, making them exploitable. You want allow illegals to come here to be exploited? I'm sorry, but I don't think it's ok to use humans that way.

Your initial argument seemed to be that illegal immigrants don't actually have a negative impact on legal citizens. I countered by giving examples of how they do have negative impacts. To which, it seems, you responded by saying that the people being impacted negatively deserve what they get. This argument is contradictory and, quite frankly, ugly.

You have not understood my views or my point. Instead you've made a lot of unpleasant assumptions and assigned to me views that are not mine.

[INTroJect]

TheLoneINTJ:
I already stated my views on this subject in another thread. To save you the trouble of tracking it down, I'll repost it here:

Those who view it as a racial issue either want to build a wall on the US/Mexico border (which is ridiculous, IMO... how does that stop illegals from places other than Mexico?) or, on the other side of the argument, open the borders and allow illegals to work here for slave wages.

What's ironic about the latter view (and somewhat sad) is that it seeks to allow the exploitation of the very group of people who they are trying to support.

In my opinion, the best way to solve the illegal immigration issue is to fix our immigration and naturalization system, making legalization an achievable and affordable goal for those who want to stay, and making work visas easier to obtain for those who want to come here to work.

We in agreement on the important part of this debate: rights and welfare (not govt welfare). The open borders argument means that there are no 'illegals', they have all the standard american rights under the law by virtue of their presence, thus ending their status as exploited. I am all about that happening which is why I am saying, although with limitation for health and criminal status: "Let them come." The problem with this legal/illegal immigration bubble is just that: it has created a class of non-citizens living here who do not have the same rights that we have come to take for granted. In the end, the only viable and respectable option at this point is to give the 20 million (I read different numbers, some argue that it is that much) who are here a path to legalization/citizenship. Certainly not robbing them and sending them all back, that would be a 21st century "trail of tears" and our great-great-grandchildren will study us in their history books and wonder how we could do such a horrible thing.


We do not live in a free market capitalist system. We have many measures in place to protect the rights and the quality of living of the workers, such as minimum wages, unions, labor laws, etc. Business owners are able to bypass these (somewhat more expensive, but IMO very important) measures by hiring people who have no legal recourse, no labor unions and paying them shit.
Paying everyone a fair wage does mean that we will pay more for things. I think paying a dollar or two more is worth the payment in human rights and dignity, not to mention the longer-term boost to our economy.

Those legal measures of protection are important and they do work most of the time but there are some things missing here that go way down at the foundational level as to how the world turns.

Where I live, $7 an hour isn't a living wage. It's pretty impossible to support yourself, much less a family, on $7 an hour. And most illegal immigrants don't even get paid minimum wage, which where I live is $5.75 an hour. Citizens are losing their jobs because people are exploiting an illegal workforce. This is bad for everyone, especially the illegals, who are not even being paid a living wage, let alone what their labor is actually worth.

No, you're misinformed. $15-$20 has been the industry standard pay for most labor jobs (especially construction) in my area for years. Legal citizens get paid that amount. The $7 an hour is what illegals get if they're lucky. If they're unlucky, they get less than minimum wage. Also, I don't think you understand exactly what goes into working a construction job if you think it's worth $7 an hour. Teenagers get paid that to work at Best Buy. Before taxes, a person making $7 an hour grosses a whopping $280 a week.

Wage isn't luck. The worth of a wage is an agreed upon price, certainly not slavery, between 2 parties and either party has the option to cancel at any time. If it wasn't a 'living wage' everyone making it would be dead. That part is simple. The citizens, illegals and legals all have the option to relocate. With this again, there are economic forces here that are an entirely different discussion.


No, it seems like you don't understand the economics involved here.
Many citizens here in the US can't go to college for economic reasons, just as I'm sure many illegal immigrants can't afford to go to college either. Also, in your vision of how things should be, it seems that all legal citizens would be educated and wealthy, while the illegals would be the cheap source of labor that the citizens can exploit by underpaying them, not compensating them for injuries sustained on the job, and making them work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. Remind me, which of us is on the side of the illegals?

I am not sure where I am misinformed here. In fact, I was at Yale the other week, here is a link for you: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. call Tom Conroy, his number is on the upper right, he will tell you all about it.

Also, I had the opportunity of spending my childhood watching a single mother raise 3 children (me being one of them) on $7.15/hr. And this was not very long ago at all. I know what it means to be poor and I also know that it was completely our fault as a family, once one accepts responsibility for their circumstances and stops blaming Mexicans, the government, snow, asteriods, etc, all of these problems just go away. Completely in the opposite direction.


We don't live in free market capitalism. As I already mentioned, we have many systems in place to ensure that workers get paid a fair wage. Illegals, because they have no legal recourse, don't have access to those systems, making them exploitable.

Yes I understand that you mentioned before that we are not in a capitalist society, however, repetition does not make it correct. Capitalism is always there if we want it to be there or not. Its the reason that it is the dominant system on the planet because, ultimately, government/society has to reflect reality or it will trip like a circuit breaker and crumble and fall and be replaced by a more congruent version. There are some temporary deviations from this but, ultimately, civilization will follow that course.

People are not coming here illegally because they are are into a masochism and want to be exploited. The only possible reason for someone to move to what seems to them a strange, mean, pill popping and cultureless society as the USA is that it is in their best interest to do so and the employers would not be hiring them unless it was also in their best interest.


Your initial argument seemed to be that illegal immigrants don't actually have a negative impact on legal citizens. I countered by giving examples of how they do have negative impacts. To which, it seems, you responded by saying that the people being impacted negatively deserve what they get. This argument is contradictory and, quite frankly, ugly.

You have not understood my views or my point. Instead you've made a lot of unpleasant assumptions and assigned to me views that are not mine.

Yes. There is a 'negative' impact to the illegal part of immigration. That negative impact is similar to how someone very recently stated that the laws he breaks are of minimal value but the laws broken by another are a detriment. If you ask an illegal about why he broke that law he will give you the exact same argument of how trivial it is by comparison to other things, like being part of the reason that people are killed. Go ahead, try it. He will certainly not say that he enjoys the part that we call "exploitation", however, he will also tell you that it is the better of the other options that are available.

Now, after a long digression, to get to the subject of the thread: Should those who come to America learn to speak English? Yes, they should. And my observation into the subject shows that, although it is not as fast as ordering a happymeal, eventually they do. It's not a subject that is worth getting heated over. We can shake our fists around and Poo-Poo the changing of the tides, it might speed up the learning somewhat but with a lot of unnecessary Poo. Some of the people who come here later in life just can not learn it easily, they all acknowledge that importance of learning it for their own well being but it is just not easy for people after a certain age. If they don't learn it their children do and, quite often, the grand children don't even learn the origional language. The end result is always the same.

[Lucid]

We in agreement on the important part of this debate: rights and welfare (not govt welfare). The open borders argument means that there are no 'illegals', they have all the standard american rights under the law by virtue of their presence, thus ending their status as exploited.

I think the open borders idea is the "Gordian knot" of the immigration issue and is just as detrimental as closed borders would be. However, I am in favor of immigration reform (heavy reform).


Wage isn't luck. The worth of a wage is an agreed upon price, certainly not slavery, between 2 parties and either party has the option to cancel at any time. If it wasn't a 'living wage' everyone making it would be dead. That part is simple.

It isn't luck. It's an agreement. But if you lose the ability to negotiate for a decent wage then everyone loses. Except the employers, of course.
"Living wage" as I use the term, is kind of a figure of speech. I thought it was widely used, but maybe it's more regional than I realized. It doesn't mean that if you aren't making a "living wage" that you will starve. It means that it won't cover the cost of living. Where I live an average 1 bedroom apartment is about $750 a month. Energy bills vary, but are usually about $75 - $100 a month. Groceries for one person, buying generic brands and using coupons, comes to about $200 a month (minimum). A bus pass costs $54 a month, obviously the gas, insurance and maintenance for a car is more expensive. All this comes to $1104. You'll notice I'm not including phone service, sewer or garbage collection, a car or the costs associated withit, or any kind of insurance. I'm also not including anything other than the very basic necessities. I'm not talking about clothes, toilet paper, soap or any of the other things that most people use daily but aren't necessary for survival.
At $7 an hour, before taxes, you make $1120 a month. So you're really barely scraping by. At 5.75 you're bringing home $920 before taxes. Obviously, there are things you can do to reduce your costs (like getting a roommate, for example), but it's still difficult.

An example of what I'm talking about is the Irish immigrants who came here at the end of the 19th century. You should do some research into this, if you haven't already. It illustrates very clearly what I'm talking about. They basically worked in sweat shops. The Irish were willing to work in these conditions because it was still an improvement from Ireland at the time, where they were starving. I'm sure that the illegals, in many cases, are willing to come here and work for $3.00 an hour and live in cramped conditions because it's better than what they had available in their home countries. Because of this, it lowers the wages and the standard for the entire industry.

I am not sure where I am misinformed here. In fact, I was at Yale the other week, here is a link for you: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

So you can take the courses online for free. That's awesome. It's a step in the right direction. But since, as this article says, the program is like a virtual audit, it seems it's not possible to actually earn a degree this way. While education for its own sake is wonderful, I don't think this will help people change their economic status by earning a degree.
I have had to dedicate the last 7 years of my life to getting a degree. It's taken 7 years for me because I have to work while I go to school in order to pay for living expenses and tuition. And tuition isn't cheap, even though I go to a public university and am getting grants from the government. It has required that I make MANY sacrifices, so if you're trying to tell me that anybody can go to college who wants to and that it's easy to get a degree, I'm afraid that I must disagree.
There are many reasons people can't go to college for a variety of reasons.

I know what it means to be poor and I also know that it was completely our fault as a family, once one accepts responsibility for their circumstances and stops blaming Mexicans, the government, snow, asteriods, etc, all of these problems just go away. Completely in the opposite direction.

I think you may be misinterpreting what I'm saying. But first I want to say that I will not have a "white people vs. Mexicans" discussion because I don't think race should have any part in a debate about immigration at all. It is an issue of economics, not race. Race has been used by people on both sides of the debate to muddy the argument. But to make it a racial issue is to make it an issue (on both sides) of allowing some races into the country more freely or less freely than others. And that's not what it should be about. All races should have equal access to citizenship.
But, to make my point, I'm not trying to say that if we stop illegal immigration all our economic problems will go away and that the only reason anyone is being underpaid is because of illegals who are willing to do the job for less than it's worth. That's simply not the case. It seems like because I'm not for open borders and because I think that illegal immigration is a bad thing (and despite the fact that I think it's as bad, if not worse, for the immigrants), you're lumping me into this group of ignorant racists who just want a scapegoat for their troubles, and it's really frustrating to have to combat prejudice like that just to have a discussion about how to improve the system.


Yes I understand that you mentioned before that we are not in a capitalist society, however, repetition does not make it correct. Capitalism is always there if we want it to be there or not. Its the reason that it is the dominant system on the planet because, ultimately, government/society has to reflect reality or it will trip like a circuit breaker and crumble and fall and be replaced by a more congruent version. There are some temporary deviations from this but, ultimately, civilization will follow that course.

I'm not saying we aren't in a capitalist system. Just that it's not purely capitalistic. Other examples of this are our anti-monopoly laws, corn subsidizing, corporate bail-outs, etc. Some of these things are good, some bad, but we don't live in a strictly free market economy.

People are not coming here illegally because they are are into a masochism and want to be exploited. The only possible reason for someone to move to what seems to them a strange, mean, pill popping and cultureless society as the USA is that it is in their best interest to do so and the employers would not be hiring them unless it was also in their best interest.

I agree. They're coming here because the conditions are better than their native countries or because they want to make money. I certainly don't think that they want to be exploited. But when you have 5 or 6 people living in a one-bedroom apartment (because they're being paid $7.00 an hour or less) who can't get medical care and don't have equal rights, to me that's exploitation. If the business owners aren't paying them the industry standard for their work because the illegals have no legal recourse and need the work, that's exploitation. I'm sure it is in the best interest of the employers. Having the Irish work in sweatshops was in the best interest of the employers too. That doesn't make it ok.


He will certainly not say that he enjoys the part that we call "exploitation", however, he will also tell you that it is the better of the other options that are available.

But why should they be exploited just because it's better than the alternative (staying in their mother countries)? We should just say, "well that's the way it is and it sucks and it's not fair, but why bother making it better"? I'm sorry, I think this is a problem we can solve and that solving it will benefit two groups of people; both the already legal citizens and the immigrants.

You seem to think that I'm blaming illegals for allowing themselves to be exploited, and I'm not. And that I'm blaming illegals for the economic hardships of the working class who are citizens. I'm not. I'm saying that both groups are being impacted negatively under the current system and that this should be changed.

[xhaan]

First of all, they should learn to speak the language because it's the language of the country. No other country that I can think of doesn't expect immigrants to not learn the language of the land, so why should we bend over for people that don't want to learn English?

As for Illegal Immigration, it's that: Illegal. You can claim all you want that the first settlers were "illegal" but the locals were not a sovereign nation like we are today. They were tribes of people that control local areas or were nomads when the English/Spanish/French/Dutch all started settling here.

As for America being "free", how is it free? Can people speak whatever language they want? Sure. But should businesses be able to say, "You must speak English if you want a job here"? Yes. You can't say America is free and at the same time force that "freedom" down the throats of others.

I tend to agree, especially on the language. It's fine if people want to come here not knowing English, I have absolutely zero problem with that. But I also feel people should take the time to learn it, at least to a passable extent, if they are deciding to live here permanently.

My rule of thumb is (as an American), this is our country (how we got it is now irrelevant), and if you become a citizen here, you are now one of us. Not European-American, though they may have come from Europe, not Japanese-American, though they may have come from there, they become Americans. Keeping the previous culture alive is just fine with me, but I feel we (Americans) shall have our own culture also.

I find it ironic and absurd that everyone wants to preserve Hispanic and Asian and African culture, often at the cost of diluting American culture. We have become an indistinct melting pot because of it, the only thing that separates us is our textbook history, and perhaps some of our music and other things which were invented here, but aside from that the country is just a big mishmash of cultures that people brought with them.

And as far as legal/illegal immigrants go, legal ones should have 100% citizen status, and have whatever job and pay they are qualified for. Language requirements are fine, (going back to learning English..) Illegal ones, well, they can't be here. Yes, we do have a big country, but as with any country, we can't have every person here, we only have so much work and space to support everyone. It is unfortunate, but at some point, somebody has to be left out, or we will have problems.

And mind you, I'm speaking this as a Native American decendant, I had relatives that were "here FIRST". I feel that the Native American culture (all of the tribes/bands) is part of American culture, mixed with much of what came here at the point which we became a sovereign nation. There are things which were invented *here* by Americans (they originated here, not somewhere else and brought over), which are also part of our culture.

[nightfire]

I am sorry for intervening in this discussion. Not being an American, I can't contribute much to it; still, my question will be on-topic. Some other economically developed countries, for example, Canada or Australia, have various "Skilled migration" programs - for example, if you want to become a permanent resident of Canada, the only main requirement is to have "at least one continuous year of full-time, paid work experience or the equivalent in part-time continuous employment". Would you be for or against U.S. having a similar program? With illegal immigration this high, European Union being a strong competitor and rising potential of Asia, this would appear to be a wise decision to try to attract more scientists/skilled workers/other professionals... Or not?

[quentin]

It's not as if Spanish vs. English are particularly difficult vs. each other. If you speak English and after a couple of years of study can't understand Spanish, you are indeed an idiot. Spanish is child's play. It's an Indo-European language with Latin roots with thousands of easily understandable cognates. It's not a genuinely foreign language such as Finnish or Tamil or Mandarin. On the CIA test for foreign languages, Spanish and French and Italian and German rank a "1" vs. a "4" on the difficulty scale for Korean, Japanese, Mandarin, etc. It of course goes both ways - if you're a Mexican/Puerto Rican, after being exposed to American TV for so many years, and considering how easy English is to native Spanish speakers, and you still can't understand basic English? Tu idiota! (Sorry, can't do the upside down ! and ? functions on my current keyboard).

I am saying this as a native English speaker who has studied and applied Mandarin (very, very difficult, but I can speak it as well as a 5 year old boy - which is quite an accomplishment!), Tagalog (only the basics, because everybody in the PI speaks English), Bahasa (very easy; I once asked out an Indonesian girl who didn't speak a word of English solely for the purpose of practicing my Bahasa on our first date - and I didn't perform too badly, linguistically), Taiwanese (only to cuss people out in traffic), and some very, very basic Spanish (difficult to avoid speaking at least a little bit of that in America, ain't it?)

[Bossy Mom]

I majored in Spanish and minored in German, but to call someone who has a problem (after a couple of years) learning Spanish an idiot is extremely unfair. It takes a lot of time from our very busy lives to learn another language and some very intelligent people I know have trouble learning foreign languages.

[quentin]

If you can't learn Spanish you will never be able to speak any foreign language. It's by far the easiest language for a native English speaker to learn.

You don't have to be fluent in Spanish, but if after a couple of years study you should at least be at the level of a 5 year old boy. You just aren't applying yourself if you can't.

It takes a lot of time from our very busy lives to learn another language

That's just it. It's all about motivation. Most people don't learn foreign languages because they are not motivated to do so. For most Americans, learning another language is impractical - when are you going to use German or Japanese in real life, if you live in the U.S.? Everybody speaks English, so why bother except as an intellectual exercise?

There are quite a few societies where almost every person is bilingual: India, the Philippines, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Taiwan, China (local dialects/Mandarin), Paraguay, Bolivia, Singapore, Hong Kong/Macau, Quebec, Wales. Learning a foreign language is not that hard. Why is that almost every educated European you meet can carry on a basic conversation in English and we can't in Italian/German/French etc.? Because Europeans are highly motivated to learn the International Language.

[tabasco]

"tThose that who come to America the United States should speak eEnglish."

Fixed. :cheesy:

By the way, "bahasa" just means language. Saying you speak Bahasa makes no sense, seeing we all do speak "language" one way or another. You need to state the entire phrase, which is either Bahasa Indonesia or Bahasa Melayu depending on which language you're referring to. Saying you speak Indonesian or Malay is also acceptable... if not preferred. I also need to point out that Mandarin is actually a lot easier to learn than Spanish - at least where grammar and sentence structures are concerned. Since you're going to speak your foreign language with a really bad accent anyway, might as well learn the one that is less complicated.

[quentin]

You're right, I should have specified Bahasa Indonesia. I wasn't aware that you referred to the dialect of Java as "Indonesian", since aren't there hundreds of separate languages spoken in the archipelago? Likewise, I thought that Malay referred to a family of languages and ethnicities - Tagalog is a Malayan language, as well as Bahasa Malaysia and Cebuano.

You're correct that Mandarin and the other Chinese languages have practically no grammar. It's just a matter of putting one word in front of each other - no tenses, no verb inflections, pluralization is easy, changing a noun or verb to an adjective or adverb is very easy, etc. However, Mandarin is 10x more difficult than Spanish to pronounce - many of the sounds are rough on the English speaker's tongue, and then there are the tones. Tones are very, very difficult. Good thing Mandarin only has 4 - Cantonese has 5 and Taiwanese has 7! Also, if you don't speak Chinese exactly, precisely correctly, then people will look at you bug-eyed as if you are speaking Martian. English is easy because we are used to foreigners mangling our language - anyone can speak English very, very badly and still be understood. Chinese, on the other hand, is a language that because of the tones (every word is a homophone) must be spoken flawlessly in order to be understood.

For example, there are 4 or 5 different ways to pronounce "Chicago" or "New Orleans" in English, but any one of those ways can be easily understood. In Mandarin, if you ask for dumplings (sui jiao), you get the tone wrong, it could come out as, "I want to sleep." There's an old linguist's joke about how you could theoretically create a sentence like this in Mandarin: "Ma ma ma ma ma ma ma ma?" (Is mother scolding the horse or is the horse scolding mother?) Depending on the tone, "ma" has one of 4 different meanings.

I've studied both. Spanish is way, way easier than Mandarin. It's not even a contest.

[yondyr]

Isolationism is not necessarily a bad thing. Throwing open borders I consider as foolish as impoverishing oneself in order to feed the hungry in other countries. Uh oh..I feel another thread coming on..Should we send aid in the form of money, food, or medical supplies when it's not tied to some form of population control?

[Lucid]

Throwing open borders I consider as foolish as impoverishing oneself in order to feed the hungry in other countries.

Agreed. With respect to those who believe it, in my opinion the open borders idea is naive at best, and beneficial only to people in a position to exploit unskilled or uneducated workers who come here out of desperation, to the detriment of our own workers, skilled or otherwise.

[Pinkie]

If you can't learn Spanish you will never be able to speak any foreign language. It's by far the easiest language for a native English speaker to learn.

Just a very brief hijack - I disagree with you there, actually. I reckon German's much easier to learn. German and English are fundamentally related (have you ever read Old English? It's like a crazy mix of English and German); they've got much the same basic structure and vocabulary and phonemes. Of course, my experience of Spanish is EXTREMELY limited, so feel free to call me an idiot if you will, but if you could explain to me how Spanish is easier to learn, I would much appreciate it.

My two cents on the topic in hand - if you go to a country to live there, you should make an effort to learn the language. It really isn't that hard. I would do it if I went somewhere - I took French lessons before I spent just a week in France - and while I don't expect people to shell out for tuition, I don't think it's too much to expect someone to pick up at least a few basic phrases.

[OmegaPsi]

I've never understood how people can sympathise with the "If you get caught at the borders game over, but if you get past them, YOU WIN!!!! YAY...." concept. The law is the law. I don't really care what hardships you currently have in your country or fammily when it comes to our laws. I mean, if your broke, it doesent give you the right to rob a bank.

*Edit (I Noticed I went sort of off topic..) *Edit^2 further clarification

On the topic, I do expect someone to learn some English when coming to a primarilly spoken English country. I do not expect people to work with me or understand me if I dont make the effort to speak their language.

[Lucid]

Just a very brief hijack - I disagree with you there, actually. I reckon German's much easier to learn. German and English are fundamentally related (have you ever read Old English? It's like a crazy mix of English and German); they've got much the same basic structure and vocabulary and phonemes. Of course, my experience of Spanish is EXTREMELY limited, so feel free to call me an idiot if you will, but if you could explain to me how Spanish is easier to learn, I would much appreciate it.

Well I took both German and Spanish and I had a MUCH easier time with the Spanish. I signed up for German first thinking that because English and German are so closely related it would be easer... it wasn't. The syntax seems to be different in a very confusing way. Also, Spanish is phonetic.
Another contributing factor, I think, is that I live in an area where there's lots of Spanish spoken, so I'm exposed to it more and I went into the class already knowing, not only some words, but some things about how Spanish grammar and syntax works as well. It's challenging to learn a foreign language, but it can be done. And if you're immersed in it, it makes it much much easier.

[Pinkie]

Well I took both German and Spanish and I had a MUCH easier time with the Spanish. I signed up for German first thinking that because English and German are so closely related it would be easer... it wasn't. The syntax seems to be different in a very confusing way. Also, Spanish is phonetic.
Another contributing factor, I think, is that I live in an area where there's lots of Spanish spoken, so I'm exposed to it more and I went into the class already knowing, not only some words, but some things about how Spanish grammar and syntax works as well. It's challenging to learn a foreign language, but it can be done. And if you're immersed in it, it makes it much much easier.


This might sound like a strange question, but how old were you when you started learning them both? Because it has occurred to me that I may have found German quite easy because I started learning it fairly young. Just a theory, though.

[quentin]

That's a good point. The younger you are, the easier it is to pick up languages. Babies and children are super-absorbent little sponges. Once you start hitting 30, though, learning new languages become really difficult. It's extremely difficult for someone over 40 to successfully pick up a new language.

[Bossy Mom]

Because Europeans are highly motivated to learn the International Language.


Motivation? Are you motivated to make a quilt? That is what I like to do in my spare time. I'm not trying to learn Italian or Portuguese or anything else. How people spend their time is not your concern.

[quentin]

If you choose to live in a foreign country, learning the language of the language is your concern. This is a bit more important and practical than learning how to sew a quilt.

[Lucid]

This might sound like a strange question, but how old were you when you started learning them both? Because it has occurred to me that I may have found German quite easy because I started learning it fairly young. Just a theory, though.

I was 24 I think. For both of them.

[brainiac]

At the risk of sounding facetious, last time I checked America was a continent with many different languages. I think you meant USA.