Does the United States really want to fix

[Value Buy]

the unemployment rate?
No.
MSNBC this morning was discussing undocumented workers in America.
First let's call it what it is.
Illegal aliens working in America. They are actually documented. We know they are working here, so they are illegal, not undocumented.
The government knows they are here.
In 2010 illegal aliens held 5.2% of the jobs in America.
5.2% is a heck of a number.
Cut the unemployment rate? Easy.
Send the illegals home.
Now I will be the first to admit that some if not 50% of these jobs might be jobs white and black America may not want to do.
I do not care.
If Americans refuse to work these menial jobs when nothing else is available, then, that person should not be considered "unemployed, or out of work".
Citizens refusing to work them are gaining our system.
At this point, I also believe all federal and state unemployment and welfare subsidies should be discontinued from these citizens.
If our citizens are working for minimum wage,poverty level jobs, etc, then extend some benefits their way, giving them some incentive to stick out these entry level jobs. Some will move upward on the job level, some will remain at the bottom of the job ladder.
Not everyone can be a policeman, teacher, firefighter, or rocket scientist, so America must admit this and accept the fact a certain percent of our citizenry will work in lower level jobs all their life.
Until we all admit this, we cannot solve the unemployment levels in our country.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 7:16:16 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

the unemployment rate?
No.
MSNBC this morning was discussing undocumented workers in America.
First let's call it what it is.
Illegal aliens working in America. They are actually documented. We know they are working here, so they are illegal, not undocumented.
The government knows they are here.
In 2010 illegal aliens held 5.2% of the jobs in America.
5.2% is a heck of a number.
Cut the unemployment rate? Easy.
Send the illegals home.
...

Give or take, 130 million jobs in US.
5.2% is 6.5 million people.
What is your plan on how to "send (6.5 million) illegals home"? Seems that any process to do that, in and of itself, would go far in temporarily cutting the unemployment rate.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 8:06:09 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Well the other dynamic would be that if there were no illegals to do the work that Americans wouldn't do then either the wages for those jobs would increase until they would, or those jobs would be exported. In some service job situations, such as house cleaning or yardwork, the jobs would disappear if the wages needed to be too dear.

Part of the plan in the OP is to cut any subsidies for anyone refusing to work the jobs. I would assume that this means refusing to work for any wage that is offered to them. The idea seems to be if people are homeless and hungry enough, they will take anything.

[zibazinski]

If you are able bodied, you need to work, period. Don't like your job? Take steps to get a better one. Not society's job to support you. As far as the illegals. If you don't rent, educate, or empty them, they will leave. Don't treat them medically, either.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 8:11:31 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:09:43 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Part of the plan in the OP is to cut any subsidies for anyone refusing to work the jobs. I would assume that this means refusing to work for any wage that is offered to them. The idea seems to be if people are homeless and hungry enough, they will take anything.

Yup. It worked during the depression.

IM(not so)HO, we need to just bluntly say we are going to put people into the position of starving/freezing to motivate them to take any work available if that is going to be the plan.

[Deleted]

Jun 14, 2012 8:21:05 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:11:31 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Yup. It worked during the depression.

IM(not so)HO, we need to just bluntly say we are going to put people into the position of starving/freezing to motivate them to take any work available if that is going to be the plan.

The problem is that charities still offer the homeless all sorts of stuff. We have to stop them for this plan to work.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 8:22:04 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:21:05 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

IM(not so)HO, we need to just bluntly say we are going to put people into the position of starving/freezing to motivate them to take any work available if that is going to be the plan.

The problem is that charities still offer the homeless all sorts of stuff. We have to stop them for this plan to work.

They will be totally overwhelmed by the increases in homelessness. I don't think we really have to worry about them.

[Deleted]

Jun 14, 2012 8:33:01 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:22:04 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

The problem is that charities still offer the homeless all sorts of stuff. We have to stop them for this plan to work.

They will be totally overwhelmed by the increases in homelessness. I don't think we really have to worry about them.

Obviously the better plan is just to continue letting illegals into the country and take jobs and strain services that they don't necessarily pay for! Good idea.

Both parties have completely dropped the ball on this issue. Dems because they like the voter base of Hispanic voters and Repubs because they like the cheap labor.

As much as I'd love to see stiff financial penalties for anyone employing an illegal immigrant from any country, it's not going to happen because both parties are complicit.

[Deleted]

Jun 14, 2012 8:33:01 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:22:04 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

The problem is that charities still offer the homeless all sorts of stuff. We have to stop them for this plan to work.

They will be totally overwhelmed by the increases in homelessness. I don't think we really have to worry about them.

Hopefully you are right. I have a feeling that the public would greatly increase their charitable giving allowing charities to handle the increase, but you never know.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 9:00:30 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

...

As much as I'd love to see stiff financial penalties for anyone employing an illegal immigrant from any country, ....

I support long hard general population prison terms for all, including top executives, employing illegal immigrants. Otherwise, it is just another cost of doing business.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 9:15:54 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Jun 14, 2012 9:01:40 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Hopefully you are right. I have a feeling that the public would greatly increase their charitable giving allowing charities to handle the increase, but you never know.

I would increase my charity spending right now if the government would stop giving my tax money to people who feel they are too good to work.

Would you give it to charities that are supporting the people that the government has stopped supporting because they feel they are too good to work?

[luckyme]

" Americans wouldn't do then either the wages for those jobs would increase until they would, or those jobs would be exported. "

Not if you have a entire population of forced labor, which is pretty much what most here advocate by stating that people need to take the crap jobs or starve, due to cutting of all public assistance.


" I support long hard general population prison terms for all, including top executives, employing illegal immigrants. "

Totally in favor of this. If there are no jobs, no services for those here illegally, then hopefully, many would return home.

However, the US really has to address the issue of anchor babies. We have about 55 girls in the local high school pregnant. A large portion of them are Latino. According to someone who works w/ them, the girls were encouraged to get pregnant by their parents. I don't know if this is a cultural thing, or if the hope is to produce an anchor baby.

From personal experiences, our local Catholic Social Services seems to be serving a lot of Latinos. Half of the elementary classes are also now ESL students.

Even if not directly hitting the social services, the school districts have been enlarging the elementary schools, and hiring more ESL teachers. Not counting the growing number of problems w/ gangs. So certain employers are gaining cheap labor, but the community is paying a high price for it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The real problem with illegal immigration is that our immigration policy ought to be adjusted to meet demand. We used to have a guest worker program in the 1960s- it's not a new idea. It was shut down by political pressure from unions who wanted to protect American jobs. Not really working out to well, is it? We ought to authorize them, tax them, let thei labor be priced above board in a legitimate market, and fine the shit out of people that skirt the law. Kind of like raising the speed limit to 80 and then strictly enforcing it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

And no benefits for illegals. Period. No benefits for non-citizens, and a child of an illegal is not a citizen, and no benefits for naturalized citizens for their first 25 years.

[vandalshandle]

Jun 14, 2012 8:04:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 14, 2012 7:16:16 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

the unemployment rate?
No.
MSNBC this morning was discussing undocumented workers in America.
First let's call it what it is.
Illegal aliens working in America. They are actually documented. We know they are working here, so they are illegal, not undocumented.
The government knows they are here.
In 2010 illegal aliens held 5.2% of the jobs in America.
5.2% is a heck of a number.
Cut the unemployment rate? Easy.
Send the illegals home.
...

Give or take, 130 million jobs in US.
5.2% is 6.5 million people.
What is your plan on how to "send (6.5 million) illegals home"? Seems that any process to do that, in and of itself, would go far in temporarily cutting the unemployment rate.

My guess is that the Border Patrol would have to get 2 or 3 new vans in order to deport 6.5 million people. Of course, they would all be back withing 12 months, so they would all have to be deported again...and again...and again. In the meantime, you would have to do without lettuce on your Whopper. Howeveer, the hiring of new BP agents down here in the Southwest would put an end to unemployment down here.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 14, 2012 10:36:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

And no benefits for illegals. Period. No benefits for non-citizens, and a child of an illegal is not a citizen, and no benefits for naturalized citizens for their first 25 years.

So former lawful permanent resident aliens who held Green Cards and who are now U.S. citizens, cannot receive benefits for 25 years even though during your required 25 year waiting period they paid federal, state and local taxes.

What a world you would require us all to live in.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 14, 2012 8:03:02 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Why would anyone want to do the jobs the illegals have when they can get the government to support them?
This is the problem.

i disagree that this is the problem. i think it is way more complicated than that.

[workpublic]

My guess is that the Border Patrol would have to get 2 or 3 new vans in order to deport 6.5 million people. Of course, they would all be back withing 12 months

the first step in dealing with this invited invasion is to seal the borders. then start the round up. it wouldn't be as hard or harrowing as the illegals defenders claim.

heard a bout a college in CO that charges in stae students $4500 , out of state students $16000, out of country(illegals) $7200.

so if you're a legal immigrant and live out of state you have to pay $16000. if you're an illegal from anywhere $7200.

how does that encourage legel immigration and discourage illegal immigration.


www.theamericanresistance.com/issues/in_state_tuition.html

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 11:27:46 GMT -5 workpublic said:

...

the first step in dealing with this invited invasion is to seal the borders. ...

The Wal-Mart immigration sweep of October, 2003, netted large numbers from Mexico, the Czech Republic, Mongolia, Brazil, Poland, Russia, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Lithuania and some from from African and Asian countries. (From your link)

Just seal the borders.

[mmhmm]

Shrink wrap! ;D

[workpublic]

the Czech Republic, Mongolia, Brazil, Poland, Russia, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Lithuania and some from from African and Asian countries.

seal the airports for those

netted large numbers from Mexico

seal the border for those.

and I suspect that many of the first group, if they don't fly here they fly to mexico.

1800 mile mexican border . lets alot 180000 troops. 100 per mile.

yes i know some toes will be stepped on and God forbid that happens.


I guess you and bills think we should do away with any border security cause it's just too impossible? where's your American "can do" spirit" ?

[formerroomate99]

Jun 14, 2012 11:26:18 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 14, 2012 8:03:02 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Why would anyone want to do the jobs the illegals have when they can get the government to support them?
This is the problem.

i disagree that this is the problem. i think it is way more complicated than that.

That's because you have this absurd fantasy that the vast majority of people are born with an inate work ethic and desire to be useful that doesn't go away no matter how they are raised.

And no matter how many times people tell you that not everyone is like this and that they aren't like this, you still refuse to believe that there is a large segment of the population that value their leisure time much more than they value self sufficiency.

[fairlycrazy23]

No need to do mass deportation, make it harder to get in and unpleasant to stay and the problem will sort it self out.

Tighten the border security, this doesn't really seem that difficult, there are examples where they have done just that and border crossing dropped in those areas and moved to other areas.
The military could take a more active role in border security.
We have also seen where laws/rules making it unpleasant for illegals have caused them to move to other areas/states. Make them universal and they will eventually leave.

We should also make it very unpleasant to hire illegals.

We should create better guest worker programs, however, I do not think we need too much foreign labor for unskilled jobs. There could be a 'guest' worker program for domestic workers who are unemployed or even under employed where the government could possibly 'make up' the difference in the low pay.

We do need to work our way out of this culture of dependency on government that has grown up over the last 50 or so years, but we certainly can't make wholesale changes overnight.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 14, 2012 12:06:05 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Jun 14, 2012 11:26:18 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i disagree that this is the problem. i think it is way more complicated than that.

That's because you have this absurd fantasy that the vast majority of people are born with an inate work ethic and desire to be useful that doesn't go away no matter how they are raised.

are you trying to piss me off, or did you genuinely think this was relevant?

for the record, i never claimed that upbringing had nothing to do with work ethic. so now you are just making shit up. what i said is that people come bundled with a desire for a sense of purpose. it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with work, but it often does. it is not a crazy idea, it is actually pretty well known, as this absurd fantasizer notes:

www.amplifyfestival.com.au/news/Detail/why-work-the-desires-that-drive-us-07062011

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 11:46:21 GMT -5 workpublic said:

...
1800 mile mexican border . lets alot 180000 troops. 100 per mile.
...

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do that we can just ship to the border? Or are we going to increase the military by that number (plus training and support personnel)? Want to put a dollar amount on that?

[fairlycrazy23]

Jun 14, 2012 12:38:55 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 14, 2012 11:46:21 GMT -5 workpublic said:

...
1800 mile mexican border . lets alot 180000 troops. 100 per mile.
...

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do that we can just ship to the border? Or are we going to increase the military by that number (plus training and support personnel)? Want to put a dollar amount on that?

I really don't think that we would need anywhere near that amount, but I think that our current military budget could be adjusted, even reduced and still allow for the military to play a significant role in border security.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 14, 2012 12:43:02 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

Jun 14, 2012 12:38:55 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do that we can just ship to the border? Or are we going to increase the military by that number (plus training and support personnel)? Want to put a dollar amount on that?

I really don't think that we would need anywhere near that amount, but I think that our current military budget could be adjusted, even reduced and still allow for the military to play a significant role in border security.

you are assuming that we would stop offending and start defending. not a very safe assumption, imo.

[workpublic]

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do

probably between the ones presently sitting around in europe and asia.

or we could borrow some NG from each state.

or we could ask for volunteers to be used specifically for just this purpose.

[billisonboard]

Jun 14, 2012 12:43:02 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

Jun 14, 2012 12:38:55 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do that we can just ship to the border? Or are we going to increase the military by that number (plus training and support personnel)? Want to put a dollar amount on that?

I really don't think that we would need anywhere near that amount, but I think that our current military budget could be adjusted, even reduced and still allow for the military to play a significant role in border security.

Why should the military play any role in border security. Why not simply increase the manpower of the Border Patrol?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 14, 2012 12:47:02 GMT -5 workpublic said:

Do we have 180,000 men and women in uniform sitting around now with nothing to do

no. but thanks to outsourcing, we really don't even need to recruit volunteers any more. the feds can just hire a private army. (don't take this as advocacy. i think it is hideous)

probably between the ones presently sitting around in europe and asia.

or we could borrow some NG from each state.

this is also a well established trend, since 911

or we could ask for volunteers to be used specifically for just this purpose.

yeah. and how many people, other than the type that post on bulletin boards, would really want to sit out in the desert with automatic weapons, shooting unarmed women and children all day?

yes, i know this is a reducio ad absurdum. deal with it.