[larkin]

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	As it stands, I find the mexican communities to generally be cultural vuvzuelas - loud, uncouth, idiotic, irritating, and rather pointless. PS - I was aware that the vuvuzelas are primarily Brazillians'

Your opinion of not just illegal or even simply immigrant communities, but Mexican communities seems like a great basis for making policy, doesn't it?

And for the last time: vuvuzuelas are South African.

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The ROI is sky high - consider the value of uncrowded schools, uncrowded hospitals, higher real wages for working class (legal) Americans, an end to de facto discrimination against (legal) immigrants, not having to listen to that incredibly annoying "aye aye aye" music. But corporate profits will go down, campaign donors will get pissed, and the democrats might lose an important electorate!

I'm sure that all of those things will flower once we build that fence. Kind of the same way that in your handy four step guide, "Securing the border" is listed as a second step with no further elaboration. (What are we even having this debate for? Didn't we all realize that securing the border was as easy as listing it as a step? *facepalm* Note to self: add "Win the War in Afghanistan" to my to-do list.)

Even your potshots are wrong - illegals can't vote, so what electorate is anyone losing? Although perhaps again you're conflating illegal immigrants with just Mexicans (TM) and probably even all Hispanics. Well, sorry to say this, but Mexican communities and that annoying "aye aye aye" music and the "vuvuzuelas" that Mexicans definitely use aren't going anywhere. Even after you "secure the border" as described so thoroughly in step two.

[Sulla]

	Originally Posted by larkin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Even your potshots are wrong - illegals can't vote, so what electorate is anyone losing?

I agree with pretty much everything, but you may want to reword this as "illegals aren't supposed to vote." They, along with many other groups not allowed to vote, somehow manage to find ways to beat the system. Honestly, I'm not sure how, but given how voting is done in my area, it isn't surprising. Some areas have made policies that make it significantly easier.

[larkin]

	Originally Posted by Sulla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I agree with pretty much everything, but you may want to reword this as "illegals aren't supposed to vote." They, along with many other groups not allowed to vote, somehow manage to find ways to beat the system. Honestly, I'm not sure how, but given how voting is done in my area, it isn't surprising. Some areas have made policies that make it significantly easier.

Voter registration fraud is sometimes common;
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
. Hard to believe anyone would risk a felony conviction for an additional vote, let alone an illegal immigrant risking deportation for the one.

There are undoubtedly easier ways to try to influence the outcome of an election - like telling legal immigrants that they will need an extra $200 to pay for paperwork or they'll be deported, challenging their registration and immigration status at the polling place, or petitioning veter registration boards to have voters whose mail is returned purged from the rolls. Which of these doesn't require personally convincing thousands of people unaffiliated with the campaign to risk an easy felony conviction or worse? So which of these schemes do you think is actually more common?

[Sulla]

	Originally Posted by larkin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Voter registration fraud is sometimes common; To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. . Hard to believe anyone would risk a felony conviction for an additional vote, let alone an illegal immigrant risking deportation for the one.

I've seen that article. I don't find it particularly convincing. I'd say voter fraud is very common. We very frequently see counties and precincts with more votes than registered voters. I think most of the time it's a wash- fraud on one side matching fraud on the other.

There are undoubtedly easier ways to try to influence the outcome of an election - like telling legal immigrants that they will need an extra $200 to pay for paperwork or they'll be deported, challenging their registration and immigration status at the polling place, or petitioning veter registration boards to have voters whose mail is returned purged from the rolls. Which of these doesn't require personally convincing thousands of people unaffiliated with the campaign to risk an easy felony conviction or worse? So which of these schemes do you think is actually more common?

Depends. A lot of what you proposed requires a very strong ground presence. It's very, very effective. My dad actually ended up in the south (thank God he did) because he was working in a campaign- his job was to go through voter rolls and be prepared to challenge anyone who was dead, lived on the interstate, was a felon, etc. as well as organize rides for people to go to the polls who were considered toss ups. I haven't worked on campaigns but my friends who have indicated things aren't done this way much anymore (at least in Mississippi). I'd say it's much easier to make it easier for voter fraud to occur than to police it on the other side.

I'd also say there's a 0% chance of an illegal getting caught at our polls. Maybe a 1% (a big maybe) when they register to vote. It's probably different elsewhere.

[Warrior]

I think Arizona is being singled out because several other states have laws that basically do the same thing as the Arizona law and they have been around for years. Arizona is late to the game on this one.

My father recently had a situation where a worker from the company he contracts to could not produce documentation when asked. He called ICE about it and ICE told him to contact the local sheriff's office. He was told local law enforcement was his primary contact for suspected illegal immigrant/worker issues in his area. No federal legal action there. Instead, the federal government relies on local law enforcement deal with many such situations.

[Undead Bonzi]

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	OK so let's say I'm off by a factor of 2. So we need 16,000 people in order to properly police the entire border. Let's call it an average of 50,000 per head. 16,000*50,000 = 800,000,000. Throw in another, say, 100k per worker for startup costs, you're at a paltry 1.6b in startup costs, or even 3.2 billion in startup costs, .8 billion per year.

Actually, you are off by an even more significant factor than 2. Your initial estimate of 1 man per half mile of border does not take into account basic labor demands. Your estimate makes the assumption that one lone man is sitting on the border 24/7, 365 days a year which is obviously faulty. Your equation would actually only account for the number of officers guarding such a border at any one given time.

In reality it takes 4.725 men per half mile to guard the border and hit a 40 hour work week to avoid paying overtime (and this is ignoring vacation and sick leave so let's round that number up to 5 employees per half mile). This number ONLY represents the guys watching and does not take into account support staff, transportation and arresting officers.

So, using your numbers we now have 40,000 employees being paid 50k yearly resulting in $2,000,000,000 in straight yearly salary (neglecting insurance, holiday pay, injuries, retirement, natural turnover, training and continuing education ext ext.) just to keep eyes on the border 24/7, 365 days a year.

Now lets figure some support staff. Generally support staff for any type of operation exceed direct line personnel by at least 4 to 1 (this is janitors, cooking, clerical, equipment, shipping, motor pool exct). Lets continue traveling through happy land and assume the US government created the single most efficient business entity ever know and has achieved a whopping 1 to 1 ratio of support staff to field operatives on this border operation. That's an additional 40,000 people (some of whom are highly skilled technicians who make far more than your eyes on the border and others who are grunt labor and make far less) for simplicity let's just assume it averages out to roughly the same as the field officers. That's another $2,000,000,000 in yearly salary (again neglecting all additional costs commonly associated with employees).

Add in that 100k per worker startup cost is another $4,000,000,000 in initial building costs (and as an architect I can tell you that figure doesn't even come close to building the support facilities needed for 40,000+ workers spread out over such a vast distance but we will roll with it). Now let's figure life cycle cost of these magically cheap facilities. A good rule of thumb is that over a 10 year period the operating cost of a facility will end up being 5 to 10% of the initial building costs of said building neglecting employee salaries (so just maintenance, upgrades, energy ect). So assuming 10% annual operating cost we are seeing another $400,000,000 in yearly facility fees (and I can assure you this far far far lower than any actual cost would be).


So to secure the US/Mexico border a more accurate figure would be around:

$4 billion in yearly salary for 80,000+ employees.

$400 million in yearly facility fees (which is probably short by a factor of at least 10)

$4 billion in new facilities (which is also probably short by a factor of at least 10)

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The ROI is sky high - consider the value of uncrowned schools, uncrowded hospitals, higher real wages for working class (legal) Americans, an end to de facto discrimination against (legal) immigrants, not having to listen to that incredibly annoying "aye aye aye" music. But corporate profits will go down, campaign donors will get pissed, and the democrats might lose an important electorate!

Schools: Illegal's live in housing. The housing generates property tax. Schools are supported via property tax. Illegal's are paying for the schooling the receive.

Hospitals: 2/3 of hospital visits are by those 65 or older, the majority of whom are baby boomer generation and not illegal. If you want to reduce hospital crowding you are looking in the wrong direction.

Higher working wages for working class: Which will be met with higher housing and food costs just to name two key sectors which stand on the backs of cheap illegal labor.

No 'aye aye aye' music: I was unaware that Popeye had gotten a record deal. Guess that means I'll be free to enjoy my Hannah Montana...or I could just change the radio station or listen to my iPod or stop grasping at lame-assed excuses.

Corporate profits will go down: Corporate profits won't go down, the price of goods will go up.

Campaign donors will be pissed: And then they will find a new politicians pocket to line and somewhere in the background the Lion King sound track 'circle of life' will softly play.

Democrats will lose an important vote: By limiting the population of a class of individuals who can't vote...

[Causa Mortis]

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

Your opinion of not just illegal or even simply immigrant communities, but Mexican communities seems like a great basis for making policy, doesn't it? And for the last time: vuvuzuelas are South African. I'm sure that all of those things will flower once we build that fence. Kind of the same way that in your handy four step guide, "Securing the border" is listed as a second step with no further elaboration. (What are we even having this debate for? Didn't we all realize that securing the border was as easy as listing it as a step? *facepalm* Note to self: add "Win the War in Afghanistan" to my to-do list.) Even your potshots are wrong - illegals can't vote, so what electorate is anyone losing? Although perhaps again you're conflating illegal immigrants with just Mexicans (TM) and probably even all Hispanics. Well, sorry to say this, but Mexican communities and that annoying "aye aye aye" music and the "vuvuzuelas" that Mexicans definitely use aren't going anywhere. Even after you "secure the border" as described so thoroughly in step two.

Its the second step to stop demand-pull immigration and drug smuggling. And illegals can't vote, but their war on english cohort, "ser humano es nunca illegal" bullshit crowd can.

And yes: its Mexican illegal immigration that I'm concerned with, because Mexican illegal immigration is changing the zeitgeist of America in strikingly plebeian ways.

I already addressed the vuvuzela issue, your portrayal of it here is intellectually dishonest.

	So to secure the US/Mexico border a more accurate figure would be around: $4 billion in yearly salary for 80,000+ employees. $400 million in yearly facility fees (which is probably short by a factor of at least 10) $4 billion in new facilities (which is also probably short by a factor of at least 10)

Its worth 100 billion per year easy. Its probably worth 300 or 400 billion.

Schools: Illegal's live in housing. The housing generates property tax. Schools are supported via property tax. Illegal's are paying for the schooling the receive. Hospitals: 2/3 of hospital visits are by those 65 or older, the majority of whom are baby boomer generation and not illegal. If you want to reduce hospital crowding you are looking in the wrong direction. Higher working wages for working class: Which will be met with higher housing and food costs just to name two key sectors which stand on the backs of cheap illegal labor.

So your argument in paragraph 1 is that illegals leaving will cause property values to fall. And then that illegals leaving will cause property values to right. Pick one, you can't have both. Unless you're bullshitting.

	No 'aye aye aye' music: I was unaware that Popeye had gotten a record deal. Guess that means I'll be free to enjoy my Hannah Montana...or I could just change the radio station or listen to my iPod or stop grasping at lame-assed excuses.

You're free to be an asshole and annoy me with your stupid low-rider mini van and your retarded cowboy hats and your asinine music, but unfortunately I'm free to use my capacity to vote (which I have a right to do) to take ever-greater actions against illegal immigration until the problem is solved.

	Corporate profits will go down: Corporate profits won't go down, the price of goods will go up.

You completely ignored my argument:

Government fixes the price of most agricultural goods to the point where efficient corporate firms earn significant economic rents. The market price doesn't respond to a shift up in supply unless the shift up is so high that no one can produce at the fixed price (highly unlikely). A lower quantity of wage-intensive food winds up being produced domestically, which is as it should be in a very high-wage country.

	Democrats will lose an important vote: By limiting the population of a class of individuals who can't vote...

People who don't belong here, who don't value education, who are the most obese demographic in America, who clog prisons and schools and hospitals, who are an incredible cultural blight, and who - rather than integrating into the melting pot - turn entire cities into shitholes that resemble Tiajunana.

Don't think for a moment that America is a better place to live than Mexico because of something special about its geography. Fill the borders of America with Mexicans and it steadily becomes more like Mexico. And guess what? I don't want that - I want to build a Sweden or a Denmark where we're prosperous, educated, healthy, community oriented, stable, flexible, and innovative - and Mexico is about as far from that as you can get. We can't take everyone with us - least of all people who generally fail to acquire even a modicum of erudition.

[larkin]

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	And yes: its Mexican illegal immigration that I'm concerned with, because Mexican illegal immigration is changing the zeitgeist of America in strikingly plebeian ways.

You didn't say Mexican illegal immigration in your first post - you said Mexicans, which is a point you make crystal clear later in this post:

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Don't think for a moment that America is a better place to live than Mexico because of something special about its geography. Fill the borders of America with Mexicans and it steadily becomes more like Mexico.

You don't like Mexicans. How they're different from Italians or Irish or whomever that came before, often illegally, is unclear, but got it.

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I already addressed the vuvuzela issue, your portrayal of it here is intellectually dishonest.

How is it intellectually dishonest to correct you when you're wrong, twice?

[Ray9]

	Enforcement of existing law is at the discretion of the jurisdiction. Brand new laws creating new immigration policies specifically undermine a federal government trying to craft a coherent immigration policy.

When exactly did the immigration policies of the United states become incoherent? The problem is that the laws are not being enforced which jeopardizes the safety of the citizens of a border state that is directly affected by illegal immigrants. Arizona has been made an example of for purely political reasons. Elected officials should consider the best interests and particularly the safety of those who put them in office. Instead those in Washington are trying to implement some grand plan that relegates constituents as fodder for the collateral damage neccessary to carry out the plan. The people of Arizona have no recourse but to act in desparation having been abandoned in favor of some politically motivated social engineering experiment. The people who foist this misery on Arizona will suffer no consequences from it, they are comfortably sheltered from the vicissitudes of their failure to act as they return to their gaited communities in total protection. The robberies, rapes and murders are just collateral damage that happen to other people who must endure them because they don't understand the grand plan. It's the same old story, abuse power to create a desired outcome at the expense of those too weak to fight back. People who support this may want to take a long, hard look at their political philosophy. Meanwhile, the coming elections are going to be a rude awakening for some.





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

[Booko]

	Originally Posted by Sulla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I agree with pretty much everything, but you may want to reword this as "illegals aren't supposed to vote." They, along with many other groups not allowed to vote, somehow manage to find ways to beat the system. Honestly, I'm not sure how, but given how voting is done in my area, it isn't surprising. Some areas have made policies that make it significantly easier.

I'm the poll manager of the precinct smack in the heart of the area in ATL most full of illegal immigrants.

And they do not show up at my precinct to vote.

There are only a handful of Latinos who vote, and they're legal because I and my other poll clerks know them from the neighborhood anyway. Most of the community these days is Latino or Asian - it's about evenly split. Most of the voters are the old white folks still living there and the Asians who've been naturalized. The Asian demographic is steadily growing.

So I'm dubious about all these claims about how illegals are all out there voting. You would think if that were so I might have seen someone at least try in the past 12 years.

I haven't.

What I have seen is an increasing attempts at legal voter intimidation on the part of white folks of a certain party affiliation who use GA law to try to challenge the vote of people they think will not vote their way. In GA anyone can challenge another voter's right to vote.

Funny how the only people who show up on the Challenged Voter list are POC.

While I consider it possible that in your area something funny is going on, just because it's not impossible and I don't live there, I do know from experience that people who have never been part of running a vote often misunderstand things and think someone is voting or being denied a vote unjustly. As a manager I get the fun job of explaining the process to these people in the (occasionally vain) hope they might exercise some logic and realize there is no funny business going on.

If you think something funky is going on in your area, it behooves you to understand to the best of your ability what processes exactly are used in your area. The best way is to be part of that process yourself -- odds are there's a poll manager who needs a clerk and you can be it. It's a very long day but with a good crew it's quite fun as well, even though we're deadly serious about doing everything by the book.

Failing that, find someone in your area who is involved in the process and pump them for information. You might find learning about the process is rather fun and you'll have a better idea of what checks and balances there are in the system and how one can and can't really get around them.

[Urshulgi]

We have somewhere between 250,000-400,000 illegals in the greater Houston area.

We make skilled immigrants wait years and go through a drawn out and complicated bureacratic process, but we let unskilled and functionally illiterate rural Mexicans have a free run of the land. The hispanics who have been here for awhile regard the newcomers the same way I regard white trash.

Mexicans in America have a higher birthrate than ones in Mexico do. Part of the concern is that many aren't embracing the concept of having a small family and sending their kids to college, but instead they are embracing the concept of having a bunch of kids who are supposed to grow up to be laborers, in a country where those kind of occupations are declining in both value and ability to provide for a family. This will create a huge stress on already overburdended social and health services.

On April 21st of this year, the anniversary of the Battle of San Jacinto, which freed Texas from Mexican dominance, the elementary school down the street had no celebration. On Cinco de Mayo, this same school had Mexican flags lining the fence that borders the school. As a native Texan, how the hell am I not supposed to have a problem with that? We can't celebrate defeating the Mexican army, because it might offend the mexican students who are alledgedly supposed to be loyal to America?


I really try to keep an open mind, but cruise around Houston for a few years, and you might find that your tolerance steadily erodes.

[phoboser]

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

Part of the concern is that many aren't embracing the concept of having a small family and sending their kids to college, but instead they are embracing the concept of having a bunch of kids who are supposed to grow up to be laborers, in a country where those kind of occupations are declining in both value and ability to provide for a family. This will create a huge stress on already overburdended social and health services.

Yes, we are importing what looks to be a permanent underclass. OOW birth rate, high school dropout rate, functional illiteracy rate of 2nd to 4th generation Mexican-Americans are staggering. They aren't adopting middle-class values, but minority urban values.

California is at the bottom in state education rankings now. Gee, I wonder why.

[Takeru]

	Originally Posted by phoboser To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yes, we are importing what looks to be a permanent underclass. OOW birth rate, high school dropout rate, functional illiteracy rate of 2nd to 4th generation Mexican-Americans are staggering. They aren't adopting middle-class values, but minority urban values. California is at the bottom in state education rankings now. Gee, I wonder why.

1: It is called a giant population (36m and counting compared to Texas' 24m and counting.) It is varied from the coast to the Sierra-Nevada mountains. It is 1/10th of the total U.S. population. It is one of the most diverse state in America. Silicon Valley is different from Hollywood. Not everyone is going to go for Hollywood as not everyone is going to go for Silicon Valley. Of course there is going to be variations.

2: One of California's main industry is agriculture. A lot of the lands in the valley are fertile for farming. This can possibly mean farm laborers.

3: Since the population is varied, some places have more students per teacher while others have few students per teacher.

[phoboser]

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

1: It is called a giant population (36m and counting compared to Texas' 24m and counting.) It is varied from the coast to the Sierra-Nevada mountains. It is 1/10th of the total U.S. population. It is one of the most diverse state in California. Silicon Valley is different from Hollywood. Not everyone is going to go for Hollywood as not everyone is going to go for Silicon Valley. Of course there is going to be variations.

I don't know why you think this is relevant.

	2: One of California's main industry is agriculture. A lot of the lands in the valley are fertile for farming. This can possibly mean farm laborers.

Farm laborers are stupid of course, and because this could possibly be the reason (only in your head) it therefore is worth mentioning.

	3: Since the population is varied, some places have more students per teacher while others have few students per teacher.

Yet the problems seem to predominate when the students are Mexican-American.

[Takeru]

	Originally Posted by phoboser To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I don't know why you think this is relevant..

It is like saying because America is obese as a whole means America is obese. Colorado is different enough from the other states since it's obesity rate is different from the southern states. Even then, the obesity rates are different from each state and city.

Case in point, your generalizing a huge population.

	Originally Posted by phoboser To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yet the problems seem to predominate in places when the students are Mexican-American.

That is like saying African-Americans are the same way
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

[larkin]

	Originally Posted by Takeru To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That is like saying African-Americans are the same way To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. .

He's already made this assertion,
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and elsewhere. Not surprising that someone who believes this would think that Mexicans have to be a permanent underclass. Kind of the same way Germans were in the 1840s, or Italians and Irish were in the 1890s, right? Enough to make you wonder if the actual fear is that they'll remain a permanent underclass, or that they won't.

[Urshulgi]

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

He's already made this assertion, To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and elsewhere. Not surprising that someone who believes this would think that Mexicans have to be a permanent underclass. Kind of the same way Germans were in the 1840s, or Italians and Irish were in the 1890s, right? Enough to make you wonder if the actual fear is that they'll remain a permanent underclass, or that they won't.

I don't think you're seeing the depth of argument here. This isn't xenophobic reactionary fear we are expressing.

This is a matter of acknowledging the reality of the demographics, and questioning how bright their future in America is going to be, given the direction their culture seems to be going. Growing up in Texas, and spending a lot of time in heavily hispanic areas, I can tell you that there is a growing gulf in American hispanic culture. Rather than being one big group, there is a divide between working/middle class hispanic culture, and the migrant/low income culture. The former has a bright future in America, the latter is questionable.

It is very rational to question what the long-term implications of a low-income culture that has an explosive birth rate are, because we are going to be the ones who have to deal with it. Your tax dollars will go to subsidize it, so you should be asking more questions as well.

[Pachystima]

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

He's already made this assertion, To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and elsewhere. Not surprising that someone who believes this would think that Mexicans have to be a permanent underclass. Kind of the same way Germans were in the 1840s, or Italians and Irish were in the 1890s, right? Enough to make you wonder if the actual fear is that they'll remain a permanent underclass, or that they won't.

I suspect that if there had been an internet when the Irish were fleeing the famine and coming to the USA, the same sort of bigotry would have been on line then. Anyone who has read some of the crap that was published back then regarding Irish immigration would recognize the same theme (eg. not our kind, wrong religion, sub-human, they are after our women etc. & etc.). Some things never change.

[TenochAcampicht]

	Originally Posted by Pachystima To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I suspect that if there had been an internet when the Irish were fleeing the famine and coming to the USA, the same sort of bigotry would have been on line then. Anyone who has read some of the crap that was published back then regarding Irish immigration would recognize the same theme (eg. not our kind, wrong religion, sub-human, they are after our women etc. & etc.). Some things never change.

Actually, that level of bigotry DID exist, speaking as a half-Irishman, I would advise all to google the NINA laws, not to mention (although it being a movie) to rent Gangs of New York, being Irish meant you're guilty.

Now, being half-Mexican, let me give my other opinion.
Everyone complains about us, we steal the economy, create poverty, etc.
Anyone ever consider that without us, where would the American economy be?
I don't see your average American going to pick fruit for like $3 a day, work in a
zero ventliation factory, or go listen to that horrible excuse for Mexican music called
Banda/Norteño (that crap with the accordian and trumpet) in some sweatshop.

Here is a novel idea, make a fair immigration system, that doesn't openly favour the
rich, have us have decent VISA to work programs (becase many of us who are illegal
merely overstayed their VISAs), and here is another idea. Equal pay for both legals and illegals, why? Because as Capitalism works, there is then no incentive to hire and illegal
immigrant if you have to pay the same for an illegal and give them the same working hours
as a legal immigrant or citizen.

Here is a point of mine, everyone moans about the racial makeup changing, yet originally the Southwest was Mexican anyway (yes Mexican, the word Mexican comes from Nahuatl which is an Uto-Aztecan language that originated in the Southwest which we in Nahuatl call by it's indigenous name, Aztlan, we called it that way for hundreds if not thousands of years, why we should change it because a bunch of guys from England got disgruntled is not our issue),
has anyone here ever heard of NYC? Over there it's extremely diverse and oddly it works

[Pachystima]

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

Here is a point of mine, everyone moans about the racial makeup changing, yet originally the Southwest was Mexican anyway (yes Mexican, the word Mexican comes from Nahuatl which is an Uto-Aztecan language that originated in the Southwest which we in Nahuatl call by it's indigenous name, Aztlan, we called it that way for hundreds if not thousands of years, why we should change it because a bunch of guys from England got disgruntled is not our issue), has anyone here ever heard of NYC? Over there it's extremely diverse and oddly it works

Most of the people I know that live in my part of southern Arizona would not live anywhere else; myself included. When I travel, the absence of signs in Spanish seems strange to me. I really enjoy the mix of Mexican, Anglo and Native American culture that surrounds me. To stand in line at the grocery store and hear the checker greet one customer in Spanish and the next in English is a real treat. I love the mix of music I can listen to on the radio and watching Telemundo helps me to understand spoken Spanish.

Where I live, over half of my neighbors have Spanish surnames. They are kind, gentle, family-oriented people and good neighbors. I was injured in a bicycle/car accident not too long ago. More than half of the responding Deputies and Paramedics had Spanish surnames. Professional and considerate they were.

One of my neighbors says that his family has lived in this part of the world since 1702. A lot of the east coast wasn't settled in those days. Southern Arizona was formerly part of Mexico until the Gadsden Purchase was negotiated in 1854 and his family became American by fiat on the date of the purchase.

One of the larger problems Arizona has is the Phoenix area. This has been called by some "the largest Midwestern city in the Southwest". It is populated mainly by people from somewhere outside the SW, many of them ultraconservative retirees. Since over 60% of the Arizona population lives in the greater Phoenix area, its conservatism tends to drown out the less conservative and much more rural southern and northern parts of the state. This is a problem not likely to be solved soon.

[Booko]

	Originally Posted by Sulla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I agree with pretty much everything, but you may want to reword this as "illegals aren't supposed to vote." They, along with many other groups not allowed to vote, somehow manage to find ways to beat the system. Honestly, I'm not sure how, but given how voting is done in my area, it isn't surprising. Some areas have made policies that make it significantly easier.

I'd love to see some actual facts about the processes other states use and how people get around voting laws.

I'm a poll manager here in ATL in the heaviest illegal immigrant part of town.

Sorry, but they aren't turning up to vote here.

Even before GA instituted an ID check law illegals weren't voting here.

---------- Post added 08-08-2010 at 06:29 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by Sulla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'd also say there's a 0% chance of an illegal getting caught at our polls. Maybe a 1% (a big maybe) when they register to vote. It's probably different elsewhere.

Come visit my precinct on Tuesday then. As long as you're not allergic to cats, we can find you a bed. I'm a good cook too.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


---------- Post added 08-08-2010 at 06:40 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by Pachystima To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I really enjoy the mix of Mexican, Anglo and Native American culture that surrounds me. To stand in line at the grocery store and hear the checker greet one customer in Spanish and the next in English is a real treat.

In my area there are a ton of immigrants from Asia as well. A little more south and they're from India and Jamaica. Further north are the Persians.

I love the fact I can get any food imaginable.

As for Mexicans, THANK GOD for them. When I had a raging corn allergy I had to depend on Mexican products that weren't infested with corn like U.S. products are.

Strange to think a country where corn is a staple would be better about not shoving corn in everything than we are.

	Where I live, over half of my neighbors have Spanish surnames. They are kind, gentle, family-oriented people and good neighbors. I was injured in a bicycle/car accident not too long ago. More than half of the responding Deputies and Paramedics had Spanish surnames. Professional and considerate they were.

We have some issues with too many working guys inhabiting houses and apartments. The local gov't seems to be dealing with it. That isn't the majority of the Latino population though, legal or illegal.

Most are as you say, decent family folks. My kids went to HS with many Latino kids.

	One of my neighbors says that his family has lived in this part of the world since 1702. A lot of the east coast wasn't settled in those days. Southern Arizona was formerly part of Mexico until the Gadsden Purchase was negotiated in 1854 and his family became American by fiat on the date of the purchase.

It's different here, as the "native" population is mostly black or white. Still, there have been some families here long enough to become citizens and now their 2nd generation is grown.

	One of the larger problems Arizona has is the Phoenix area. This has been called by some "the largest Midwestern city in the Southwest". It is populated mainly by people from somewhere outside the SW, many of them ultraconservative retirees.

Yeah, I've had relatives go there, though usually just as snowbirds. Mostly from MI people land in FL if they're going to stay.

[Takeru]

	Originally Posted by Urshulgi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I don't think you're seeing the depth of argument here. This isn't xenophobic reactionary fear we are expressing.

*cough* cartels and farm workers, "taking our jobs" *cough*
I can give you other points of other groups if you want me to that seems to ring loud and clear.

	Originally Posted by TenochAcampicht To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Actually, that level of bigotry DID exist

I've decided to learn some bits of history of my city and California, these things popped out of my mind as I read more and more. It kind of coincides with what the Irish and Germans went through.


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


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


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



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


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


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

[Urshulgi]

I am educated and I can communicate in English at a high level, so my argument has nothing to do with worrying about Mexicans taking my job. I also have a family member married to a Mexican-American, and I think he's great for her.



How is it fair for skilled immigrants from other countries to have to go through the official process, while a huge group of unskilled immigrants is essentially demanding to be given the rights of citizenship for free? Just because there are millions of them, and some politicians want their votes, doesn't mean their case has any basis in logic. We could send empty cruise ships to Africa, Brazil, SouthEast Asia, and India, and come back with a couple of million unskilled laborers that would love to wash dishes, pick fruit, hang drywall, mow lawns, and hang out by home depot waiting for general labor jobs. Are you going to tell me that all the immigrants rights groups would welcome them with open arms? Here's a spoiler, they would fight it tooth and nail and accuse of us undercutting Mexican immigrants, thus exposing their own racism.

It's not my fault that the social mobility in Mexico still resembles a feudal system. That's a legacy of the conquistadores, and has nothing to do with American sins. You ever wonder why it's so easy for the cartels to recruit killers down there? They see men rise from nothing to become powerful, which is almost impossible to do working a legit job in Mexico, due to the patronage system they've had in place there forever. No wonder they don't give a shit about shooting cops or soldiers, in their eyes they're just shooting the hatchetmen of a ruling class that has exploited them for years. On top of that, our retarded drug war empowers the cartels, by creating a demand they can meet. Yet our government here in the U.S. keeps pretending that there is some legitimate authority in Mexico City. Go to Jaurez, and tell me that anyone on the street there gives a flying f**K what the autocrats in Mexico City have to say.

[Sonyab]

I consider this topic a red herring. Smoke and Mirrors. The only thing I find alarming is the tenor that everyday Americans are taking with this issue. Replace the word Mexican with Jew and you have the end result of such politics. As a member of a people who had genocide practiced against them (Native American) I oppose the merest whisper of this type of behavior. The issue is too complicated to figure out quickly and will take compromise on both sides.