AZ Wrong on immigration

[CSpec]

If they are here illegally AND they're taking up a job that an American citizen could otherwise take, that's 2 reasons they need to be gone.

But for the eleventy-millionth time, no one is advocating a ban on immigration, just a ban on illegal immigration.

All companies that import should pay a sliding scale business license fee in order to tap into the richest, most lucrative market in the world, yes. They're certainly not going to pull out over it; 5 years ago toyoyo was making 75% of its global profit in the U.S. alone.

How is this not xenophobic again?

[Nick]

Are you one of those people who completely dodges the question of what to do about the millions of undocumented residents that are already here?

Hah...quite hypocritical of you considering you seem to neglect addressing any retort I have sent your way with a reasonable argument other than your own irrational justifications for how you believe things should be...also ironic that you are saying that to a comment I made in response to one of your comments which explicitly stated nothing about what we should do with the millions of illegal aliens.

Have you heard of status quo bias? Just because a law is what it is doesn't mean it should be that way. The legal immigration process is insane, much like the drug war. Notice how the fact that pot is illegal doesn't really stop people from smoking it?

Have you heard of a childish argument that holds no water? "He did it and got away with it, so why can't I?"

There isn't a single person on the freeways in California who drives 65. If I get a ticket for going 75 I suppose I can just argue with the cop and tell him "but everyone else was doing it!" That will change the cop's mind, right? Besides...it's just a silly law...what's even the point of enforcing it?

People illegally download media all the time. You mean to tell me if I download a Metallica album and get caught that I will have to go to court and possibly face jail time for it? But everyone else is doing it!

Your thinking is backwards. Immigration numbers are very highly correlated with employment opportunities--immigration is down significantly in the past few years, and in fact many immigrants have gone back the other way (both skilled and unskilled alike). Immigrants don't just show up and suckle at the teat of the taxpayer; there is only a stream of immigrants if there are jobs for them to fill. Market forces take care of it.

Nope, legal immigrants contribute and seek jobs at the same level as all the other natural born citizens because of the major fact that they are, again, LEGAL immigrants.

Illegal aliens do in fact take advantage of the taxpayers, the "system", and the inadequate enforcement of our laws. And you're right. Market forces do take care of it. When companies want to hire cheap labor who are they going to look for? The cheapest labor the can find, that's who. Prevent employers from employing illegals, and once again the "magical invisible hand of economics" would do its work, and all those positions would be filled with legal citizens. Prospective illegal aliens would have no incentive to illegally emigrate to America because they would not be able to obtain work without being a legal citizen.

Get back to me when the laid off IT guy wants to work at a meat-packing plant.

Funny you should say that. I do know a laid off IT guy. He is one of my best friends. I managed to hook him up with a small part time support gig, but other than that and a couple other side jobs, do you know what he does for work? He helps with stocking as well as loss prevention (essentially a door greeter) at a Best Buy. He does what he can to get by until he can find something better. He was willing to work ANYWHERE when he got laid off.

I got laid off from a decent job working in pharmaceuticals a few years ago. You know where I worked next? At Orchard Supply Hardware in the pick-up department loading concrete for 5 months until I nailed a position at my current place of work.

What is your point, exactly?

Edited November 25, 2010 by Nick

[Nick]

How is this not xenophobic again?

xenophobia (ˌzɛnəˈfəʊbɪə)

— n

hatred or fear of foreigners or strangers or of their politics or culture

You need to read and understand the definition of "xenophobia."

Not liking anyone else from another country is xenophobic. Not liking illegal aliens has nothing to do with xenophobia as it has nothing to do with hating immigration and foreginers, but rather, hating illegal immigration. You are compulsively (or possibly pathologically) ignoring the key difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL, once again.

Edited November 25, 2010 by Nick

[CSpec]

Not liking anyone else from another country is xenophobic. Not liking illegal aliens has nothing to do with xenophobia as it has nothing to do with hating immigration and foreginers, but rather, hating illegal immigration. You are compulsively (or possibly pathologically) ignoring the key difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL, once again.

You're ignoring the fact that there is basically no legal avenue for legal immigration anyway, so it's a useless distinction. It's a red herring in order to oppose immigration generally. Saying you only support legal immigration, but then support a system that allows for very little legal immigration, doesn't strike me as supportive of immigration.

[balthazar]

>>"You're ignoring the fact that there is basically no legal avenue for legal immigration anyway, so it's a useless distinction. It's a red herring in order to oppose immigration generally. Saying you only support legal immigration, but then support a system that allows for very little legal immigration, doesn't strike me as supportive of immigration. "<<

My family all came here as immigrants- of course I don't oppose immigration or fear foreigners. I have great pride in my ethnic backgrounds, too; made it a 15-yr spare-time project to research all the branches of my family tree (oldest branch dates back to the 1600s and there have to be over 700 individuals listed). So you're flat wrong with the xenophobic allegation.

Laws can be changed. You need to petition the U.S. Gov to do so if you believe so, but until they are; we are a nation guided by laws, laws that need to be enforced & upheld, regardless of your opinion of them.

To advocate breaking federal law at the rate of millions & millions of times over is, in fact, to oppose immigration, because entering this country illegally is NOT 'immigration'.

Continuing to obtusely & purposely ignore the definitions here is exactly like calling ::

>>You opening the door to your house & inviting me in, and

>>me slicing your screen and crawling thru a bedroom window at 4AM

"the same thing".

[CSpec]

My family all came here as immigrants- of course I don't oppose immigration or fear foreigners. I have great pride in my ethnic backgrounds, too; made it a 15-yr spare-time project to research all the branches of my family tree (oldest branch dates back to the 1600s and there have to be over 700 individuals listed). So you're flat wrong with the xenophobic allegation.

Except your assertions of rule of law are intermixed with statements about immigrants stealing the jobs of Americans, who are more entitled to them because they had the good luck of being born on this side of the fence.

[Drew Dowdell]

Except your assertions of rule of law are intermixed with statements about immigrants stealing the jobs of Americans, who are more entitled to them because they had the good luck of being born on this side of the fence.

So you're saying I'm entitled to Paris Hilton's money even though I was born on the wrong side of the mansion walls? brb, need to make a phone call.

I'd like to see immigration throttled dynamically based on employment rate. (but we need a substantially better measure of unemployment than we have today.) Very low unemployment and the door can open wider, high unemployment and the door closes.

[balthazar]

Except your assertions of rule of law are intermixed with statements about immigrants stealing the jobs of Americans, who are more entitled to them because they had the good luck of being born on this side of the fence.

Why don't you send me money in a birthday card, and more money in a holiday card, and every year after this.

Why should your relatives be "more entitled" to gifts from you than I am, simply because I didn't have the "good luck" to be part of your family. Are you xenophobic?

I'm PM'ing my addy to you right now, and my birthday is in Jan. I expect you to make up for the decades you've missed in the first check, too. I'll accept PayPal if you prefer.

What's that.... your resources aren't unlimited and you can't afford to send checks to me, everyone on this board & everyone in your town??

You're squinting; is that sunshine too bright for you ??

[CSpec]

Why don't you send me money in a birthday card, and more money in a holiday card, and every year after this.

Why should your relatives be "more entitled" to gifts from you than I am, simply because I didn't have the "good luck" to be part of your family. Are you xenophobic?

I'm PM'ing my addy to you right now, and my birthday is in Jan. I expect you to make up for the decades you've missed in the first check, too. I'll accept PayPal if you prefer.

What's that.... your resources aren't unlimited and you can't afford to send checks to me, everyone on this board & everyone in your town??

You're squinting; is that sunshine too bright for you ??

This is incredibly stupid. Should you not be allowed to move to Montana in case you take the job of an honest Montanian?

[CSpec]

I'd like to see immigration throttled dynamically based on employment rate. (but we need a substantially better measure of unemployment than we have today.) Very low unemployment and the door can open wider, high unemployment and the door closes.

Again, the market takes care of that by itself.

[Drew Dowdell]

This is incredibly stupid. Should you not be allowed to move to Montana in case you take the job of an honest Montanian?

In case you hadn't noticed, we are a group of UNITED states, of which Mexico is not a member. We are a team. Do you ever route for the home team?

Balthazar: CSpec feels that everything in this country should be outsourced to the lowest bidder... and that doing so will make things so cheap that we'll be able to afford them easier (it's his way of saying we're richer) which is good since we'll all be unemployed and collecting a check from the government that was borrowed from the Chinese. CSpec doesn't believe there is ever such a thing as too much outsourcing, or even a tipping point where outsourcing of work could actually cause a cascade effect in the economy. If your job has been outsourced, you can just get another job as a Walmart greater....

[A Horse With No Name]

Again, the market takes care of that by itself.

...and this is the most utter horse&#036;h&#33; assertion ever...

[Drew Dowdell]

Again, the market takes care of that by itself.

Uh... no.

[A Horse With No Name]

Uh... no.

He can come to Ohio and explain to people how much better off they are now that their homes are foreclosed, and that they have cheap goods at Wal-Mart.

Maybe our new Republican governor will install 120 volt receptacles under the highway overpasses so families can watch OSU football while they shiver?

Lots of good deals on cheap TV's and VCR's at Wally world...

[CSpec]

In case you hadn't noticed, we are a group of UNITED states, of which Mexico is not a member. We are a team. Do you ever route for the home team?

I like wealth. If a nice Dominican wants to come here to work and increase my wealth, that's fine with me. Forcing the nice Dominican to live in abject poverty to protect a less productive person who happens to live here does not increase my wealth.

Whenever your ancestors moved here, pick the year before that and see if you'd like it if people blocked their entry and you had to live somewhere fun like Belarus.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Dominican isn't always more or less productive than the person already living here. The productivity you speak of is the productivity of your money, not necessarily of the person doing the work. Having that person cut your lawn for $20 while you sip ice tea doesn't make you wealthier (since in your world, the only measurement that counts is $). But what you're doing is short circuiting the economic process and cutting out entire swaths of people (i.e. just about the entire middle and working classes) from participating in the economy.

You've raised someone from abject poverty to working poverty and pushed the entire American middle class down to poverty level.

Furthermore, the country is in an entirely different state than it was even 50 years ago. We no longer have explosive growth to support a massive influx of immigrants. Yes there is room for more immigration, but not at the rate we are seeing illegals come here.

[CSpec]

Having that person cut your lawn for $20 while you sip ice tea doesn't make you wealthier

Um, yes it does. Gains from trade. I want the relaxation more than the $20, and the hired help wants the $20 more than relaxation. That's what wealth is.

[Drew Dowdell]

Um, yes it does. Gains from trade. I want the relaxation more than the $20, and the hired help wants the $20 more than relaxation. That's what wealth is.

You've always told me that wealth = dollars, no other measure matters. Are you changing your story?

[CSpec]

You've always told me that wealth = dollars, no other measure matters. Are you changing your story?

My story is consistent: wealth is good. Dollars allow one to acquire wealth. Immigration is good. Trade is good. They create wealth And rent seeking is bad. It destroys wealth.

[balthazar]

Targeting only those who've managed to sneak into the country for the many benefits of American life is unjust- we should send troops into Mexico (for starters) and gently round up those living @ ANY level of poverty below the mean of the U.S. and bring them here. In fact, convert aircraft carriers & warships to passenger transports, remove all restrictions and ship in all from China & India below the mean income level here, too. 250 million here... 500 million there; howevermany- it doesn't matter; we have unlimited resources, infrastructure & employment available. Doubling or tripling or quadrupling the U.S. population will only flood all of our pockets with wealth beyond tabulation. After the 1 billion New Americans are all millionaires, we can import another billion 3rd worlders to 'do the work the New Americans' are too rich to be interested in. Eventually, the entire world's population can live here, and all the other continents can be wildlife preserves we can view via satellite. It's all good, I tell you!

[Drew Dowdell]

Dominicans are the new black gold.

[CSpec]

Targeting only those who've managed to sneak into the country for the many benefits of American life is unjust- we should send troops into Mexico (for starters) and gently round up those living @ ANY level of poverty below the mean of the U.S. and bring them here. In fact, convert aircraft carriers & warships to passenger transports, remove all restrictions and ship in all from China & India below the mean income level here, too. 250 million here... 500 million there; howevermany- it doesn't matter; we have unlimited resources, infrastructure & employment available. Doubling or tripling or quadrupling the U.S. population will only flood all of our pockets with wealth beyond tabulation. After the 1 billion New Americans are all millionaires, we can import another billion 3rd worlders to 'do the work the New Americans' are too rich to be interested in. Eventually, the entire world's population can live here, and all the other continents can be wildlife preserves we can view via satellite. It's all good, I tell you!

So our current population is absolutely 100% scientifically ideal? What a coincidence.

[balthazar]

So our current population is absolutely 100% not using any net resources, not taxing infrastructure and is absolutely 100% employeed? What a coincidence.

[CSpec]

So our current population is absolutely 100% not using any net resources, not taxing infrastructure and is absolutely 100% employeed? What a coincidence.

Oh good, this makes sense. Might as well kill anyone on unemployment, right?

[Drew Dowdell]

How about we grow into full employment before adding to the pile?

[A Horse With No Name]

Given the current brain dead operations of both major parties and their inability to fix issues...why don't we settle for some unemployment, let in a bunch of Hispanics who want to work, and see what happens?

[balthazar]

How about we grow into full employment before adding to the pile?

See; here at least we're approaching the situation with logic and the proper level of care for the native citizens the Government is sworn to protect & serve.

After that, we have to get accurate, reliable models for the future's economy & resources, and plan a prudent volume of immigrants to share a piece of the American Pie. So we all can hopefully move upward.

Unlimited, uncontrolled immigration only invites hardship, strained resources, and the cruel snatching away of said Pie, leaving only crumbs.

[CSpec]

Hey, some conservatives are coming around on this! Here's the American Enterprise Institute:

It is well-known that, for generations, America attracted Europeans, Asians, South Asians, and others to come here, learn, and in many cases start and build businesses. Modern Silicon Valley wouldn’t have been possible without this dynamic. Less well-known today is that increasing numbers of Indians, Chinese, and other talented students studying in the United States don’t plan to grow roots here. They sense more opportunity outside the United States. And they don’t want to put up with the hassles of current US immigration law.

And here, incredibly, is the National Review:

With unemployment so high, it’s time to look outside the box for new ways to create jobs. My suggestion is that we pass legislation letting more foreign entrepreneurs enter the country via start-up visas, which would give two-year visas to any entrepreneur backed by investors who was committed to hiring five or more Americans.

I don't really agree with this second one, but it's better than just waving their hands and saying illegal immigrants are t3h suck.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Germans have something like that second one. If you have 100k euro minimum and a business plan to present, you can get a start up visa.

[balthazar]

"Start-up visas" ??? Why any paperwork or requirements at all? And requiring a quota of American hires ????

How racist!

They should be able to hire illegals under the table for sub-minimum wage, so the customers of said businesses can get cheaper goods and 'get richer'.

Edited December 9, 2010 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

free market and all....

[CSpec]

"Start-up visas" ??? Why any paperwork or requirements at all? And requiring a quota of American hires ????

How racist!

It is in a sense, but on the margin it's better than just ignoring the issue and insisting on building an East German wall and pounding the table about illegals and "rule of law".

[balthazar]

I've been convinced by the sterling logic in here and I reiterate my demand: convert warships to passenger transports and ship in a billion 3rd worlders so we can all sit back & sip ice tea !! While we're at it, toss all copies of federal law books on the fire- it's December and my toes are chilly!

But seriously folks, requiring American hires is ridiculous- they have the welfare system to catch their fall- let the indescribably hard working illegals im— whoops! NeuvoMericans do the work; they hate ice tea!

While we're at it, since all colors together make black, let's change the horrid, racist American flag to a solid black rectangle! More ice over here, Juan!

[CSpec]

[Satty]

Cleveland, a perfect example because its a thriving city. The beacon of the Midwest really.

[Satty]

Seriously, were numbers for Flint not available? Of course a dead city isn't going to attract immigrants.

[balthazar]

Ahh yes, the age-old conundrum; confusing ILLEGAL immigration with legal. no DOUBT the 240K that entered Cleveland in 1920, to a man, hopped a fence to get here.

And now, because of the hundreds of thousand of illegal immigrants in the 1st half the century everyone in Cleveland sips ice tea and watches someone else mow their lawn, a veritable paradise !!

[CSpec]

Seriously, were numbers for Flint not available? Of course a dead city isn't going to attract immigrants.

My point was that there were many reviled immigrants in the 20s as well. I would assume they ended up in Cleveland to do dirty manufacturing work.

And now, because of the hundreds of thousand of illegal immigrants in the 1st half the century everyone in Cleveland sips ice tea and watches someone else mow their lawn, a veritable paradise !!

Yep. It's very difficult to conceptualize how much richer we are now than even 20 years ago.

[Satty]

It's very difficult to conceptualize how much deeper in debt we are now than even 20 years ago.

That's more like it.

[regfootball]

imagine if our income base in the country was looking up, we might be able to make a tiny dent in that deficit.

But the elite would rather see us all working for min wage. the odd dichotomy of not wanting to pay wages and then expecting the government to pick up and pay for people's subsistence so they can continue to absolve themselves from paying for labor to strip their profit centers.

[balthazar]

My point was that there were many reviled immigrants in the 20s as well.

Explain where your chart showed that they were "reviled".

[CSpec]

Explain where your chart showed that they were "reviled".

Really, balthazar? Really? Some random excerpts from Wikipedia:

Irish and German Catholic immigration was opposed in the 1850s by the Nativist/Know Nothing movement, originating in New York in 1843 as the American Republican Party. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to American values and controlled by the Pope in Rome.

By the 1890s, many Americans, particularly from the ranks of the well-off, white, native-born, considered immigration to pose a serious danger to the nation’s health and security. In 1893 a group of them formed the Immigration Restriction League, and it, along with other similarly inclined organizations, began to press Congress for severe curtailment of foreign immigration.

In 1938, there was an immigration that never happened. The immigration of the oppressed from Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler's policies was limited to only a small fraction of those who wanted to leave Germany. Due in part to anti-Semitism, isolationism, the Depression and xenophobia, the immigration policy of the Roosevelt Administration made it very difficult for refugees to obtain entry visas.

And more:

In the Pacific States, racism was primarily directed against the resident Asian immigrants. Several immigration laws discriminated against the Asians, and at different points the ethnic Chinese or other groups were banned from entering the United States. The San Francisco Vigilance Movement, although ostensibly a response to crime and corruption, also systematically victimized Irish immigrants, and later this was transformed into mob violence against Chinese immigrants. Anti-Chinese sentiment was also rife in early Los Angeles, culminating in a notorious 1871 riot in which a mob comprising every other nationality then resident in the city. Legal discrimination of Asian minorities was furthered with the passages of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which banned the entrance of virtually all ethnic Chinese immigrants into the United States until 1943.

The 20th century saw racism against immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe (notably Italian-Americans and Polish Americans), partly from anti-Catholic sentiment (as against Irish-Americans), and partly from Nordicism, which considered Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans inferior.

I was mainly referring to Nordicism when I said that the Cleveland immigrants were probably reviled. Want to know more about repugnant government policies that would make Hitler proud?

[Eugenicist Madison] Grant used the theory as justification for immigration policies of the 1920s, arguing immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe represented a lesser type of European and their numbers in the United States should not be increased. Grant and others urged this as well as the complete restriction of non-Europeans, such as the Chinese and Japanese.

Grant argued the Nordic race had been responsible for most of humanity's great achievements, and admixture was "race suicide" and unless eugenic policies were enacted, the Nordic race would be supplanted by inferior races.

Future president Calvin Coolidge agreed, stating "Biological laws tell us that certain divergent people will not mix or blend. The Nordics propagate themselves successfully. With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both sides."

The Immigration Act of 1924 was signed into law by President Coolidge. This was designed to reduce the number of Eastern and Southern European immigrants, exclude Asian immigrants altogether, and favor immigration from Northern and Western European countries such as Britain, Ireland and Germany.

How many people on this forum are what we consider "white" today, but racists in the 20s would not? How would you feel if you had to grow up in the Soviet Union, if you were even born?

[balthazar]

>>"I was mainly referring to Nordicism when I said that the Cleveland immigrants were probably reviled."<<

Don't put up a chart about Cleveland in the 1920s~today... thinking about 1850's NY, Asians in the Pacific states and Hilter... and draw broad assumptions about Cleveland and say you 'proved your point'.

Cold immigrations numbers in 1 city prove none of the above. You have an issue with past events, state THOSE and address those.

Attempts to extrapolate those to every locale in this country at every point in time and you fail at step 1.

That's the sort of sloppy, irresponsible idealistic rhetoric that spins a serious discussion right down the toilet. Don't broadbrush.

Sure some of what you read on wikipedia happened in some instances. Of course there has been racism, from all races, in all countries, thruout history. But there's a monstrous difference here.

No one today, anywhere, that I've seen, reported or rumored, is demonstrating against MEXICANS as a RACE. That is the typical race-baiting of the left.

This again is where you fail to understand the issue on the minds of those speaking up. Immigration, like everything else, needs to be sensibly moderated, not wildly unchecked.

'Moderation is the key' as is often said. Those crying out 'close the borders' are frustrated; frustrated at Gov inaction, Gov ignorance of their own laws, Gov defeatism of it's own laws, and what bears every appearance of a partisan voter grab and nothing more. Because in general (NOTHING is absolute), Americans welcome immigrants, and value those coming here who demonstrate respect for this country's laws. But when millions & millions flaunt their disregard of the law, well, why should these same law breakers be welcomed ?? Is this merely an attempt to 'erase' past history, a feel-good moment? Emotional reparation? Because that doesn't work. And the Gov still has a responsibility to it's citizens first, above non-citizens, or what is the point of Gov in the first place?

[Camino LS6]

What is getting lost when people think like C-spec:

- The concept of citizenship and just how valuable it is.

- The concept of nationhood and how essential it is.

- The reality of competition on the world stage. It really is us against them, like it or not.

- Most importantly, the concept of quality over quantity.

The US is uniquely equipped to eclipse the achievements of any other nation largely due to the fact that we are every other nation. Because we have learned to live together and tap the strengths to be found in every background. It isn't about where we have come from, it is about what we have built from our diversity. Yes, we are a nation of immigrants. In fact, we are The nation of imigrants. But what matters in that statement is the word "nation", a single identity which is the synthesis of the proverbial melting pot. It isn't that fact that we have come from other places that gives us strength, it is what we have built from that raw material.

We ignore this distinction at our peril. It is citizenship itself which allows us to create a society based on ideas rather than race, or religion, or ethnic culture. Logic, law, and justice are the guideposts. An innovative spirit which permits us to adapt and overcome, drives our grand human experiment. Consequently, citizenship has a value unknown elsewhere in the world. To allow that to diminish via open-door immigration without restriction not only weakens us, it weakens the world.

We need to be Americans in order to succeed. To create an enduring underclass of non-citizen workers is an obscenity in the face of the very ideals the nation is founded upon. It is far better to increase the standard of living and advancement of our citizenry than to increase our population. Rather than importing labor, we should be exporting ideas. It is not in our interest to dilute the dream by reducing a greater percentage of the human race to the least-common-denominator just so those in power can increase their wealth.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Camino LS6

[CSpec]

Don't put up a chart about Cleveland in the 1920s~today... thinking about 1850's NY, Asians in the Pacific states and Hilter... and draw broad assumptions about Cleveland and say you 'proved your point'.

Cold immigrations numbers in 1 city prove none of the above. You have an issue with past events, state THOSE and address those.

Attempts to extrapolate those to every locale in this country at every point in time and you fail at step 1.

That's the sort of sloppy, irresponsible idealistic rhetoric that spins a serious discussion right down the toilet. Don't broadbrush.

I'm not writing a thesis on the history of racial tensions in Cleveland, Ohio. I was merely linking to a chart that happened to be available demonstrating that Cleveland had a very high immigrant population in the 20s. Using some outside knowledge many of these immigrants were of Eastern European origin. They were most likely working in pretty miserable factories, six days a week. The parallel with Latin American immigrants picking fruit in horrendous conditions is clear. Then I linked to some historical facts about blatant racism against Eastern Europeans, starting with the President of the United States. The President declared that such people were genetically inferior to people who already lived here (what a nice coincidence). Thank God no one talks like that anymore (at least openly).

Guess what? Those folks have assimilated completely into American culture. More than that, they helped shape the fluid culture that is "American". The same happens in Spanish households--the "home language" disappears very quickly, to the point that it's very rare for the grandkids to speak it. And guess what else? Those are people. They are people with beating hearts, emotions, and aspirations. They came to this country because it offered opportunity. To the landed gentry (the readers of this forum), they are doing work that we would never consider. They left everything behind, lugged their meager possessions across the ocean (or desert) and landed in a completely mysterious land, just for the chance to work hard to give their children a better life. That's what made America great: the work ethic and entrepreneurial zeal of those who had the initiative and gumption to leave it all behind to come here.

As I linked above, there has always been a pernicious movement to cap immigration throughout the history of this country. If the Immigration Restriction League had succeeded in 1890, how many people on this forum would be in Belarus or Sicily or some other backwater, if they were even lucky enough to survive the Bloodlands of the Second World War? We evolved to be suspicious of foreigners, for the vast majority of human history was spent in hunter-gatherer tribes with a fixed allotment food, and other tribes were the enemy. We must fight the urge of this base instinct.

[Camino LS6]

Landed gentry?

You can't be serious.

[Robert Hall]

Landed gentry?

You can't be serious.

That's a good description of the framers of the constitution, circa 1776. They were mostly farmers and landowners. Odd term today, though.

[Camino LS6]

Especially when applied to our membership.

[Robert Hall]

Especially when applied to our membership.

Maybe he meant the 'legal US citizens or resident aliens' which I would assume most of our membership that reside in the US are..

[Camino LS6]

Well, that certainly doesn't qualify as "landed gentry".

EDIT: I've worked for people that could be construed as 2011's equivalent to landed gentry - but none of them are members here.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Camino LS6