Imigration????
June 13, 2007 02:26 AM EDT
(Updated: June 13, 2007 10:49 AM EDT)
views: 233
|
rating: 8.8/10
(36 votes)
|
comments: 53
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
|
|
|
Comments: 53
Nothing was noted that these schools employ Americans as teachers, parapros, food service staff, maintenance staff, etc..
Nothing was brought up that much of the reason why many of our rivers and lakes can't support fish which are safe is because of factory pollution, not population pollution.
I agree that immigration must be limited; everyone who wants to come here may not be able to do so, at least without a wait, but the "craze" and fear that has engulfed many Americans is causing "knee-jerk" reactions. Also, much of the immigration policies were initiated while Congress was majority Republicans. No explanation of that, despite the Republicans being behind much of the propaganda of immigration control.
ps: I find it interesting that there is a belief in these charts, especially the use of "off the charts" when referring to the immigration explosion, but many of these same people don't believe the data contained in charts about global warming...
It's disgusting that this country makes it more difficult for well-educated, law-abiding, experienced people in any number of fields to come here from other countries, either to emigrate, go to school or work using the legal visa system while allowing people with no education, no job experiences and no skills to speak of come in and use up resources that could be used to help our own citizens.
Dave H. our lawmakers do know in some way about the consequences of our current immigration policy, the trade deficit and global warming. Problem is they get their campaign contributions from people who don't want our policies or lack or policies in these areas to change.
As H. L. Mencken once said "If a man's livelihood depends on him not understanding something, then it is very hard to ever get him to understand it."
I have a friend in Venezuela who would love to come here and work and live. He speaks five languages fluently and has a U.S. college degree. He cannot, however, get a visa. On the other hand uneducated, illiterate, unskilled people are being promised amnesty for sneaking across the border. Something is out of whack.
The Angelenos here stick up their noses at the majority of the jobs that the immigrants are doing, since these Angelenos believe that they need to have a lot of money to do what the immigrants are doing for cheaper.
The funny thing is that the immigrants (legal or illegal) make more than I do with SSI and Disability, which means that I'm barely ekeing out a living of my own. If it weren't for my roommates, which one is part Mexican (but some of her ancestors were born here, even before this was a state), I would be out on my arse and living on the streets since it is so expensive. (Which the immigrants are not responsible for that.)
His outline/numbers did not include the illegals or ones coming in to learn at one of the schools (mainly colleges). California, especially Los Angeles, is building more schools because the teachers only want 5 to 10 kids per classroom, not because of the immigrants.
Since I worked for the Census Bureau in 2000, the rest of the population for Los Angeles were: 1) Caucasian with more than 6 kids; 2)African Americans, with more than 6 kids; 3) Asian, with 5 kids; 4)Homeless; 5)Russians/Europeans, with 5 to 8 kids; and finally 6)Latinos, with 4 to 6 kids. Los Angeles' homeless are growing rapidly, at last count about 1.5 million. I have seen many things, outlining how immigration is taking its toll on America. If, perchance, we (the U.S.) were to make Mexico, Puerto Rico (which is a U.S. territory), and Central America all states (instead of erecting a wall between Mexico and the States), we may have some sort of relief. On the subject of immigration, look at how many Canadians (nothing against them) are coming to the States and taking good paying jobs from the people in the States. (All of the broadcast news stations have at the minimum 10 Canadians.) Then, look at the celebs: Michael J. Fox, William Shatner, ad nauseum, that come here for good paying jobs, which deprives the citizens from careers.
I do apologise for the long-windedness of this, but as I said earlier, I'm part Native American,and I believe that people have the right to a better life. The people in other countries that have multiple talents can't even get a visa to come into this country.
Our country can show compassion and help curb immigration by continuing to provide foreign aid and education to stabilize third wold countries, spread democracy, and put pressure on leaders to be responsible for their citizens by providing basic human rights.
On the flip side, we have a responsibility to not be over consumers, which leads to exploitation of third world countries' citizens and natural resources. Where is the equilibrium?
So let me clarify:
1. The US already has a large population (but also a large territory).
2. There are a lot of legal immigrants coming into the US.
However,
3.) Legal immigration to the US is already a very difficult and time-consuming process, and most people who would like to come do not qualify in any way. (By most, I mean over 99%, just like Mr. Beck says too.)
[3b.) Because of the difficulties mentioned in 3.), there already are many people, among the best educated of the world, who are choosing not to come to the US but go somewhere else instead.]
4. As almost all legal immigration today is either family-based or high-end employment based, reducing current levels of legal immigration would mean
a.) US citizens would not be able to bring non-citizen family members to the US to live. (Don't let your kids travel internationally or talk to foreigners, folks, they might fall in love and you'll never see them again); and
b.) Universities, research labs and high-tech companies would be a lot less competitive internationally. A lot of what takes place in the US now would simply be taking place somewhere else.
So yes, legal immigration can be reduced, but people should first understand what it would mean to do so. Who should be cut? Will the next Einstein get in?
Other comments:
Overpopulation is a global problem, as is the resulting environmental degradation. They cannot be solved in one country. You can keep people outside the borders, but water and air pollution doesn't need a passport or a visa.
The history is sort of shaky there too. A bit of research of newspaper material through the different decades would show that the exact same arguments were made about immigration in that "golden age" as are heard today: immigrants take away jobs, they bring diseases, there's crime and gangs, they don't speak English, they're not as intelligent and/or educated as the native population, etc. It's always the same list.
As for the 1965 Immigration Act, Mr. Beck fails to mention why it led to increased immigration. It's because the previous Act allowed a large quota for Europeans, but practically nothing for Asians and other areas of the world. In the 60's, that was felt as wrong, and the 1965 Act shifted the focus toward the Third World, and from "preferred national origin" to the family and skills-based immigration we have today. (Before that, people from the preferred countries didn't need to have either American family members or special skills or education).
The 1965 Act was, of course, influenced by the principles of equality expressed in the Civil Rights Movement, and is the most important factor behind the shift from a mostly white country to the multi-ethnic country the US is today. Some people don't like that shift and will criticize the Act for this reason, but then they should be honest enough to tell us what they think is wrong with it.
In the same vein, I find that green-red population chart rather curious. Why is it that the descendants of immigrants since 1970 remain red forever? How did the descendants of previous immigrants get to be nice and green? What are the new immigrants doing wrong, apart from most of them coming from the Third World, while previously most came from Europe? Could we just change the green to white, with a (neatly seperate) black stripe, and the red to a mixture of beige and brown? I think the diagram would look almost the same.... (Except brown doesn't say "danger" and "be afraid" as well as red does, I suppose.)
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977058173
& thanks to Gaelyn for this link.
I have something to say about another subject. Everytime we as Americans support a company that out sources, we cut our own throats. Where ever I can, I kick those companies to the curb and choose to do business with a company who employes people living in America. If Everyone did that, we would no longer have to deal with outsourcing.