Debunking Immigration Myths

CY,

This is an interesting article. I disagree with Hawkins on several points, but I think it is great that he has put enough thought into the issue to write about it. Personally, I think his fecund mind would help us more if he would address more issues instead mere semantics. Yes, he does address some issues, but semantics are another major theme of his article.

What's wrong with calling someone an "illegal immigrant"? Even Lou Dobbs uses that term...

Oh Mr Hawkins. My breast always swells with pride and star-filled hope when a young, naive mind attempts to soar, sputters, and falls.

I would say that Mr. Hawkins makes some of the classical arguments for a strict border enforcement policy regarding immigrations, but that would stretch the definition of argument to the point of meaninglessness, because he actually makes no real arguments, just vague conjecture and wishful thinking.

One example is his opinion on what to do with 12 million illegal aliens.
"There's no way we can round up and deport 12 million illegal aliens." He is right in sighting this, because most people wonder. First, IT IS possible, just very expensive, but more to the point, Hawkins believes that strict enforcement of laws levied against employers:"Then, if the illegals can't get jobs here, most of them will leave."
Really?
That is a huge faith-based solution; 1. This administration or any other will never punish with fines and jailtime the very businesses that put it in power. No Administration will crack down on employers - when their hands are open waiting for a campaign contribution, they are extolling the virtues of american small business. So even if, and its a big if, the administration did convince the house and senate to actually enforce the laws against employers who hire illegals, would local government - the boots on the ground?
And one more leap of faith-based policy -- once they do, and their are no more jobs, all 12 million illegals will pack up and go home. Really? They'll go home? Or will they just go to work in an even darker shadow economy - like drug trafficking? Will we lose 12 million fruit pickers, and gain 12 million drug dealers and gang members, based on my assumption that a person has to eat.
"That means we won't need to round them up because most of them will self-deport."
Ah-ha. No evidence. No precedent, no inductive reasoning. Just wishful thinking. This kind of thinking leads to programs like "abstinence only -- the hope that if kids are not taught sex, they won't have it...sounds good in sunday school, but in the real world, you might as well hope the tooth fairy actually giving you the quarter. Real issues, in reality, require more thought than this.
This issue is far more complicated than a nascent mind like mr hawkins can handle. He should start thinking critically about this issue, instead of spewing bromides and stilted logic all over the web, like so much mental vomit.

And one last thing. He (argues), that illegal aliens are a net drain on the economy by commiting the fatel logical fallacy of "Appeal to Authority," by citing the think tank, "The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that "undocumented workers" actually cost us $10 billion a year." This Center is firstly, NOT a think tank, unless a couple of volunteers in a one room office on K Street, is now what qualifies as a think tank. Go to their publications page - they actually do no real research - the Center only publishes press releases and reports citing other peoples research. The referenced link is to a summary hinting at real research, but in intellectual honest research, people publish their report -- the entire report, so that it can be peer-reviewed -- so your assumptions, methodology and findings can be validated.
If your going to Appeal to an Authority to abdicate the obligation to provide proof of your argument, find a real authority.

This is a view that must be respected. It is harsh but real. But it is not practical basis for a public policy given the geography of the continent.
The value of legality must be protected, citizenship must not be devalued-but that said.....????.l

It is naive, yes, but we do need to enforce the employer sanctions.
Will they all go home, no, probably not even most of them.
Here in California, there are more illegal immigrants than there are jobs.
The newer illegal immigrants are self employing.
Two Irish guys recently moved a friend of mine, an off the books moving company the Two Irish Guys and a Truck.
Other illegal immigrants are selling home prepared food on the streets.
Selling at flea markets
Selling produce and other items on street corners
All the day labors are self employed for cash, all off the record of course.

There are two huge problems with this issue.
Opponents to illegal immigrants are labled Racist and Zenophobic
Opponets to illegal immigrants are labeled as anti business
The news organizations are deliberately confusing the issue by using the term immigrant for illegal immigrant.
Harold,
I thought that if I concentrated on how very bad it is for a country of laws to allow and encourage all this lawlessness I could reach someone, anyone.
You also have a very valid point. Citizenship is to be valued.