Immigration

[StLucieBengal]

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act

Looking at the framework of the immigration act of 1924.  What if we had that policy today?  

Limited immigration to 2% of current legal population born in the foreign country.   Zero immigration of Arabs and Asians.

------

That was the policy then, I could handle that today.   But We could substitute Asians for mexicans at least until we sort out the illegals.   Maybe put a 15 year stop on them and Arabs.   Then allow them in at the 2% rate.  

Then stop all H-1B visas.   It's bascially slavery.  

Deport all illegals who have any criminal record.   Give citizenship if they bring something to the table....  Education, skills, anything to make us better.   If they don't make us better but employed.   Then give work status, but never be eligible for citizenship, no voting, no benefits.   Make them find a sponsor.   Favor those who work in agriculture.  

Immigration is out of control.  We had a financial boom during 1924 - 1965. Until Kennedy opened the borders.    Time to close ranks and get caught up.  Let people assimilate to our ways.

[Yojimbo]

The easiest thing to do is fine the shit out of companies that employee illegals. When the jobs dry up, so will the immigration.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-14-2015, 03:30 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act

Looking at the framework of the immigration act of 1924.  What if we had that policy today?  

Limited immigration to 2% of current legal population born in the foreign country.   Zero immigration of Arabs and Asians.

------

That was the policy then, I could handle that today.   But We could substitute Asians for mexicans at least until we sort out the illegals.   Maybe put a 15 year stop on them and Arabs.   Then allow them in at the 2% rate.  

Then stop all H-1B visas.   It's bascially slavery.  

Deport all illegals who have any criminal record.   Give citizenship if they bring something to the table....  Education, skills, anything to make us better.   If they don't make us better but employed.   Then give work status, but never be eligible for citizenship, no voting, no benefits.   Make them find a sponsor.   Favor those who work in agriculture.  

Immigration is out of control.  We had a financial boom during 1924 - 1965. Until Kennedy opened the borders.    Time to close ranks and get caught up.  Let people assimilate to our ways.

We had a financial boom during The Great Depression?

I'll give you credit for consistency, but I don't believe being consistently wrong is a virtue.

[GMDino]

(08-14-2015, 10:46 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: We had a financial boom during The Great Depression?

I'll give you credit for consistency, but I don't believe being consistently wrong is a virtue.

At least he didn't blame the "progressives" or FDR. 

[Benton]

(08-14-2015, 06:19 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: The easiest thing to do is fine the shit out of companies that employee illegals. When the jobs dry up, so will the immigration.

Yup. Fine an employer $10,000 for every undocumented worker and hire enough people to actually enforce the law (who could probably be paid for during the first ear of inspections) and you will see the numbers of illegal aliens go down. If I remember right, $10k is currently the max amount for your third or fourth time getting caught. It starts around $200. I'd start at $10k, then $15k, then $20k.

But fines are irrelevant if there aren't enough people to enforce them. You have to fund that.

[Benton]

(08-14-2015, 10:46 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: We had a financial boom during The Great Depression?

I'll give you credit for consistency, but I don't believe being consistently wrong is a virtue.

And he's overlooking the fact we had such a boom in the 50-60s was due in large part to US companies making a lot of cash during WWII and reinvesting that in the US which — at the time — at tax rates about three times higher than current. Our financial boom had nothing to do with immigration, it had to do with US companies making a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes. Which pretty well ended with the 1980s and Reagan's tax reforms.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-14-2015, 11:21 AM)Benton Wrote: Yup. Fine an employer $10,000 for every undocumented worker and hire enough people to actually enforce the law (who could probably be paid for during the first ear of inspections) and you will see the numbers of illegal aliens go down. If I remember right, $10k is currently the max amount for your third or fourth time getting caught. It starts around $200. I'd start at $10k, then $15k, then $20k.

But fines are irrelevant if there aren't enough people to enforce them. You have to fund that.

Well, obviously you can't fine companies any more than you can tax them because the companies will just pass those costs along to the customer.  

[Benton]

(08-14-2015, 11:33 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Well, obviously you can't fine companies any more than you can tax them because the companies will just pass those costs along to the customer.  

[BmorePat87]

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(08-14-2015, 03:30 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act

Looking at the framework of the immigration act of 1924.  What if we had that policy today?  

Limited immigration to 2% of current legal population born in the foreign country.   Zero immigration of Arabs and Asians.

------

That was the policy then, I could handle that today.   But We could substitute Asians for mexicans at least until we sort out the illegals.   Maybe put a 15 year stop on them and Arabs.   Then allow them in at the 2% rate.  

Then stop all H-1B visas.   It's bascially slavery.  

Deport all illegals who have any criminal record.   Give citizenship if they bring something to the table....  Education, skills, anything to make us better.   If they don't make us better but employed.   Then give work status, but never be eligible for citizenship, no voting, no benefits.   Make them find a sponsor.   Favor those who work in agriculture.  

Immigration is out of control.  We had a financial boom during 1924 - 1965. Until Kennedy opened the borders.    Time to close ranks and get caught up.  Let people assimilate to our ways.

Some interesting stuff for sure and thought this was provocative.

The 1924 Immigration Act also included a provision excluding from entry any alien who by virtue of race or nationality was ineligible for citizenship. Existing nationality laws dating from 1790 and 1870 excluded people of Asian lineage from naturalizing. As a result, the 1924 Act meant that even Asians not previously prevented from immigrating – the Japanese in particular – would no longer be admitted to the United States. Many in Japan were very offended by the new law, which was a violation of the Gentlemen’s Agreement. The Japanese government protested, but the law remained, resulting in an increase in existing tensions between the two nations. Despite the increased tensions, it appeared that the U.S. Congress had decided that preserving the racial composition of the country was more important than promoting good ties with Japan.

As others have noted the "great depression" was hardly a boom time.  But I think you may be referring to directly before and after that, and neither are because of immigration policy.  In fact the law of yore is pretty damned racist.   Which is weird to me that you're in favor of this, considering that your wife is Russian.  McCarthy would have a field day with you.

[Mike M (the other one)]

No plan that we could put out there is going to be perfect.
We've got to change Right of Birth to Right of Blood, then tie in the number of work visa's that we will give out inversely the Unemployment Rates (high Unemployment-low visas/rare renewals, Low unemployment-high visas/high renewals).
High Fines to companies would also be a good deterrent, but we've got to actively get after those companies so that they will get the message, otherwise they will risk it.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(08-14-2015, 03:30 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote:  

   If they don't make us better but employed.   Then give work status, but never be eligible for citizenship, no voting, no benefits.   Make them find a sponsor.   Favor those who work in agriculture.  

This sounds like you're in favor of a class system.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 02:27 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: This sounds like you're in favor of a class system.

I think we need handle the illegals now by seeing what they bring to the table. Agriculture workers are needed. Not thinking class system at all, thinking where can we get the most benefit.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 10:46 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: We had a financial boom during The Great Depression?

I'll give you credit for consistency, but I don't believe being consistently wrong is a virtue.

We had booms before and the war saved us after. hoover created the depression when he did a QE

We made sure there weren't others coming in to take any jobs. And that helped

[StLucieBengal]

(08-14-2015, 01:49 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Some interesting stuff for sure and thought this was provocative.

The 1924 Immigration Act also included a provision excluding from entry any alien who by virtue of race or nationality was ineligible for citizenship. Existing nationality laws dating from 1790 and 1870 excluded people of Asian lineage from naturalizing. As a result, the 1924 Act meant that even Asians not previously prevented from immigrating – the Japanese in particular – would no longer be admitted to the United States. Many in Japan were very offended by the new law, which was a violation of the Gentlemen’s Agreement. The Japanese government protested, but the law remained, resulting in an increase in existing tensions between the two nations. Despite the increased tensions, it appeared that the U.S. Congress had decided that preserving the racial composition of the country was more important than promoting good ties with Japan.

As others have noted the "great depression" was hardly a boom time.  But I think you may be referring to directly before and after that, and neither are because of immigration policy.  In fact the law of yore is pretty damned racist.   Which is weird to me that you're in favor of this, considering that your wife is Russian.  McCarthy would have a field day with you.

Yeah russians would be subjected to the 2% rule. I could be selfish and not worry about it but I think we something drastic. Besides getting married is still allowed

[GodHatesBengals]

I do believe we need significant immigration reform.

The problem is that I refuse to agree with anything you (Lucie) have to say about the issue, by mere virtue of the fact that you have expressed your belief that foreigners are "savages".

[StLucieBengal]

(08-15-2015, 04:14 AM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: I do believe we need significant immigration reform.

The problem is that I refuse to agree with anything you (Lucie) have to say about the issue, by mere virtue of the fact that you have expressed your belief that foreigners are "savages".

Very mature.

You could at least quote me properly and have your facts straight over what I said instead of just making up whatever you wish.

Ofc you never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[GodHatesBengals]

(08-15-2015, 04:18 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Very mature.  

You could at least quote me properly and have your facts straight over what I said instead of just making up whatever you wish.    

Ofc you never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

I'm not digging up your post, which has probably been edited or deleted by now. Most all the regulars on here saw it, though.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-15-2015, 04:28 AM)GodHatesBengals Wrote:

I'm not digging up your post, which has probably been edited or deleted by now. Most all the regulars on here saw it, though.

I have not edited nor deleted any post. I stand by anything I have posted.

[jakefromstatefarm]

We do indeed need immigration reform. Part of that reform does need to include making it easier for the types of people that we want (highly skilled and educated people) to gain citizenship, as well as protecting our borders.

Things we don't need:

1) Unskilled and uneducated people (we have enough of those)

2) People looking for freebies (we have enough of those)

3) Cities operating in violation of the US Constitution as sanctuary cities

4) A POTUS that ignores the parts of the Constitution on immigration enforcement and law for political reasons