We Don't Need 'Guest Workers' (Washington Post Editorial)

[Ancalagon the Black]

In fact I've twice been eligible to get federal unemployment benefits and declined to enroll in the program for just that reason.

You do realize that you pay unemployment insurance out of your paycheck, right? You are paying the premiums for an insurance policy, and your return on that policy is directly corroborated to your premiums. Unemployment isn't the same as welfare/the dole/money for nothing.

[luckydevil]

It's not a "hispanic" thing in my mind. It's an illegal immigrant thing. I don't care where they're from, but if they're not here legally I want them GONE, and not given another opportunity to come back.

Should current immigration laws be relaxed or liberalized?

There is a reason why so many immigrants come here illegally, the legal process is difficult. My cousin has been trying to get to this country for 10 years.

[heyholetsgogrant]

The unemployment rate is near what would be considered "full employment" for the US. Yet we still have MILLIONS of illegals WORKING in the country. That tells me that there is a demand for that labor. That demand is being met and fueling american business.

What exactly is the motivation to damage our economy by cutting a major source of labor to American business? IMO the crucial problem is security - knowing who is coming in and out. That is why the guest worker program is such a great idea. Keep the labor supply strong - but document the people. Brilliant! (that's right I'm siding with Bush).

The Quesworkrer program dosent change illgeal immigration, because it forces people to wait in line, therefore people will still come here illegally....What it is really at Stake is if congress decides to make significant changes to the border making more like a fort…That may piss people off…One last question, I have is, will the quest worker program allow people to stay here to work towards citizenship, or its just a way to deport people at will…

-Grant

[heyholetsgogrant]

This is where we differ. What that "full employment" with millions of illegals working here tells me that we have a great number of positions that should be opening up for the lazy SOB's out there on welfare, unemployment, etc.... Once we get the illegals out of the country, the next step (in my mind) is to tell these people sucking on the tit of social welfare.... "There are your jobs. Take them or get cut off from ALL government aid."

Nice. Simple. Easy. Common Sense. Therefore it would never even be thought of by anyone with a government job.

What about people that cant work, like Paraplegics?

-Grant

[PokerPacker]

When it comes to jobs, a legal immigrant has the same status as a citizen. In fact, I don't even know if the Pakistanis you're referring to were citizens or immigrants. At any rate, I'm pretty sure it's not relevant to the illegal-immigrant issue, unless you are aware that they were here illegally.

some of them were definatly legal, but others could quite literally barly speak a word of english. i'm not sure of the requirements of naturalization, but i thought you had to learn the language, i could be wrong. another one of them was an Osama supporter who didn't have any morals of his own (he said the only thing keeping him from killing me or anyone else was that it was against the law.)

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You do realize that you pay unemployment insurance out of your paycheck, right? You are paying the premiums for an insurance policy, and your return on that policy is directly corroborated to your premiums. Unemployment isn't the same as welfare/the dole/money for nothing.

Yes I do understand how it works. So far as I am concerned it is still theft and I have no interest in receiving stolen property... whether it's legal or not.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Should current immigration laws be relaxed or liberalized?

NO. In fact, so far as I am concerned they need to be seriously TIGHTENED.

There is a reason why so many immigrants come here illegally, the legal process is difficult. My cousin has been trying to get to this country for 10 years.

The legal process SHOULD be difficult. Our relaxed policies on foreign nationals in this country allowed 19 men or arab descent to come into this country, get advanced training and then fly aircraft into both World Trade Centers, The Pentagon, and if a bunch of AMERICAN PATRIOTS hadn't stood up and fought back, GOD knows what other building(s); killing over 3000 people.

[Ancalagon the Black]

i'm not sure of the requirements of naturalization, but i thought you had to learn the language, i could be wrong.

To get legal residence, you do not need to demonstrate competence in English.

To become a naturalized citizen, you need to be able to answer questions in an oral test administered in English, and you need to be able to correctly write one sentence that is dictated to you verbally. (Mine was "Abraham Lincoln was a member of the Republican Party.")

The oral test consists of basic historical questions, such as "Who wrote the national anthem," "Who was the first president," "Who signed the Emancipation Proclamation," and "What year was the Hawley-Smoot Tariff repealed?" (OK, not that last one. )

[Ancalagon the Black]

Yes I do understand how it works. So far as I am concerned it is still theft and I have no interest in receiving stolen property... whether it's legal or not.

Is automobile insurance theft?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Is automobile insurance theft?

Last time I checked automobile insurance wasn't run by the GOVERNMENT. Even more importantly, money is not being taken from MY payments to pay the damages done to the vehicle of someone who doesn't have insurance through my company.

So far as I am concerned welfare, Medicare, Social Security, etc... are Unconstitutional, Socialist programs that should never have been allowed to exist in the first place. The concept that MY hard earned money is being stolen from me to fund these programs gets me a little upset (if you couldn't tell already).

[Destino]

Yes I do understand how it works. So far as I am concerned it is still theft and I have no interest in receiving stolen property... whether it's legal or not.

Do you know that unemployment benefits exist not because of the need to give handouts but as a safety measure to secure the national economy? They came about after the great depression when economist finally noticed the reduced buying power of unemployed workers combined with big losses in employment quickly worked together to worsen the economy significantly.

It's not theft - it's insurance and it helps protect the jobs and families of Americans

[Ancalagon the Black]

Last time I checked automobile insurance wasn't run by the GOVERNMENT. Even more importantly, money is not being taken from MY payments to pay the damages done to the vehicle of someone who doesn't have insurance through my company.

You are compelled, legally, to have auto insurance. What's the difference whether the government does it or some private company does it?

And the whole point of insurance is that your premiums DO pay for other people's damages. Say you're with Geico. Some guy with Geico crashes into someone else's car (say that "someone else" is insured with Liberty Mutual; it doesn't matter). Your premiums are going DIRECTLY towards paying the damages done to the Liberty Mutual-insured vehicle.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Do you know that unemployment benefits exist not because of the need to give handouts but as a safety measure to secure the national economy? They came about after the great depression when economist finally noticed the reduced buying power of unemployed workers combined with big losses in employment quickly worked together to worsen the economy significantly.

It's not theft - it's insurance and it helps protect the jobs and families of Americans

I'm well aware of the history behind it and I still consider it theft. Given an option, I would opt out of it immediately.

[ashburnskinsfan]

NO. In fact, so far as I am concerned they need to be seriously TIGHTENED.

The legal process SHOULD be difficult. Our relaxed policies on foreign nationals in this country allowed 19 men or arab descent to come into this country, get advanced training and then fly aircraft into both World Trade Centers, The Pentagon, and if a bunch of AMERICAN PATRIOTS hadn't stood up and fought back, GOD knows what other building(s); killing over 3000 people.

You're confusing immigration with temporary visitors and/or student visas.

It is very difficult for foreigners to get work visas. An interesting stat for you ... legal immigrants are THREE times more likely than American-born citizens to have post graduate degrees. A lot of the American technology economy is due to European and Asian immigrants.

Unless you get an immigrant visa based on family ties, you have to demonstrate that you are better qualified than Amercians for the job you are fulfilling.

If Americans were smart, they'd throw out all citizens who didn't have Ivy League educations, and bring in Europeans and Asians with better postgraduate degrees and experience who would be more productive.

[heyholetsgogrant]

I'm well aware of the history behind it and I still consider it theft. Given an option, I would opt out of it immediately.

earmuffs!

-Grant

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You are compelled, legally, to have auto insurance. What's the difference whether the government does it or some private company does it?

And the whole point of insurance is that your premiums DO pay for other people's damages. Say you're with Geico. Some guy with Geico crashes into someone else's car (say that "someone else" is insured with Liberty Mutual; it doesn't matter). Your premiums are going DIRECTLY towards paying the damages done to the Liberty Mutual-insured vehicle.

Actually, I don't believe that all states require automobile insurance. I could be wrong on that, but I'm pretty sure there are a couple out there where it isn't mandatory.

Unfortunately your analogy, while totally correct isn't the same as the social programs we're talking about. Here's a better one.... Let's say I have Geico. Some unisured guy T-Bones a guy with Liberty Mutual insurance. Geico doesn't say "Well, he's a nice guy and down on his luck so we're going to pay the damages for him." and then raise MY rates to cover it. THAT'S what the government is doing with these social welfare programs.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You're confusing immigration with temporary visitors and/or student visas.

No, I'm not confusing them. I'm lumping them together. So far as I'm concerned if you weren't born here and you are in this country the government ought to know why you're here, what benefit to the country your presence provides and be able to locate you quicker than the Secret Service can find the POTUS. That should continue until the moment you take the Oath of Citizenship, by which time you will have to have broken all ties with whatever foreign land you came from in the first place.

[dfitzo53]

So far as I am concerned welfare, Medicare, Social Security, etc... are Unconstitutional, Socialist programs that should never have been allowed to exist in the first place.

This may be a bit off topic, but why do you consider them unconstitutional?

[ashburnskinsfan]

No, I'm not confusing them. I'm lumping them together. So far as I'm concerned if you weren't born here and you are in this country the government ought to know why you're here, what benefit to the country your presence provides and be able to locate you quicker than the Secret Service can find the POTUS. That should continue until the moment you take the Oath of Citizenship, by which time you will have to have broken all ties with whatever foreign land you came from in the first place.

When people enter the country, the immigration services and FBI make a judgement whether or not the millions of visitors are a threat.

Even though a number of the 9/11 hijackers were known to be involved with militant Islamic organizations, the US security services choose not to track them, NOT that they were unable to track them.

Treating the many millions of foreigners who visit the USA every year, and provide hundreds of billions to the USA economy, with the kind of xenophobic suspicion you have serves nobody. We are in a global economy, and requiring that non-US nationals have no foreign interests, or vice versa, might work if you want to live in a compound in rural Texas but hardly anywhere else.

American-born citizens have contributed huge harm to America through domestic terrorism and espionage in the service of foreign powers. Pretending that being born here or taking an oath means anything in terms of loyalty to the USA is a ridiculously simplistic approach and is plain wrong.

[Midnight Judges]

BINGO

What??? You agree with that left wing rag?

[Renegade7]

Okay, so if the illegals take all the minimum wage jobs, then maybe everybody already here should invest in something else, like say, um, college? I'll admit, that's way easier said then done, but I'll be damned if people are getting mad about the fact that poor black people can't get a job at McDonald's.

[Destino]

I'm well aware of the history behind it and I still consider it theft. Given an option, I would opt out of it immediately.

You would risk the jobs and lives of many because you are more worried about paying taxes in a nation with some of the lowest tax rates in the advanced world? Sorry but that's just wrong - if you want to live in the greatest nation then you have to contribute. Freedom isn't free - and prosperity isn't either.

[Ignatius J.]

It's the free rider issue Destino. Mass wants to enjoy the benefits of one of the most stable countries in the world without contributing.

He wants to ignore that unemployment insurance has little to do with being nice to people who are falling on hard times, and fails to realize that it allows for the most efficent allocation of labor. This is of course aside from the benefits you mentioned earlier that provide a cushion in times of economic downturn for the entire economy. Our system is still being tweaked, and there are intelligent people on mass's side of the debate (see for instance luckdevil). Mass just isn't one of them.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

This may be a bit off topic, but why do you consider them unconstitutional?

Without getting too deep into the topic, check out Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. It lists the 18 prescribed powers of the Federal Government and basicly indicates that anything not on the list belongs to the individual states. I can't find anything in there that deals with social welfare at all.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

When people enter the country, the immigration services and FBI make a judgement whether or not the millions of visitors are a threat.

That's a problem. There should be an AUTOMATIC assumption that they are a threat. Make them prove that they ARE NOT a threat, not the other way around.

Treating the many millions of foreigners who visit the USA every year, and provide hundreds of billions to the USA economy, with the kind of xenophobic suspicion you have serves nobody. We are in a global economy, and requiring that non-US nationals have no foreign interests, or vice versa, might work if you want to live in a compound in rural Texas but hardly anywhere else.

It serves the good of NATIONAL SECURITY. That's all I need to know. Personally, I'd rather live in that "compound in rural Texas" than the global society that we are currently drowning in.

American-born citizens have contributed huge harm to America through domestic terrorism and espionage in the service of foreign powers. Pretending that being born here or taking an oath means anything in terms of loyalty to the USA is a ridiculously simplistic approach and is plain wrong.

Yes they have. Which is why I believe the Constitution needs to be updated to make citizenship a privledge, rather than a right. A privledge that would have to be EARNED and which could and would be removed very quickly if a person decided to act against the best interests of this country.