http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/01/homeland.security/index.html?eref=rss_topstories


30K for a US citizenship.

Sounds like a good idea, if you think about it. Well, not as a bribe, but as a surcharge or tax.

You can legally buy a U.S. investor visa if you invest $1 million in a new business that hires 10 employees.

Also, in discussing immigration reform with respect to Mexican immigrants, Congress has debated the merits of a very large "citizenship fee," which includes paying of all back taxes plus a big penalty.

Congressional opponents of the policy generally view selling citizenship as distasteful.

I am an American citizen, born here of American parents. I'm 55 years old if that matters. I married a Canadian citizen and I can tell you that doing it the right way has cost me 900 dollars in filing fees alone to this point, not counting two lawyer visits to get it correct. Five forms which total over 40 pages etc. I'm net savvy and got all the forms online but it took a bunch of calls to even find the correct forms needed. It's very complicated to do it right.

They don't make it easy and I can see why people try to slip by.

Cladari

They don't make it easy and I can see why people try to slip by.The people who "slip by" do so because they can't get in legally. Everyone who can get in legally, does.

I don't quite think that's true. Lots of people slipping in because they're very poor, they're uneducated and probably couldn't begin to figure out the paper work, and finally... it's so dang easy to waltz in and get a job.

I don't quite think that's true. Lots of people slipping in because they're very poor, they're uneducated and probably couldn't begin to figure out the paper work, and finally... it's so dang easy to waltz in and get a job.It's not easy at all to "waltz in and get a job" if you're illegal. You have to pay a lot of money for a smuggler, fake documents, and so on, the more respectable employers won't hire you at all if they suspect anything, and you constantly stand the risk of being caught.

If there's one thing every illegal Mexican knows other than agriculture, it's the basics of American immigration law as it applies to them.

Hey, I live in a border town and probably the busiest entry into the US from Mexico. Until recently we had people just running en masse across the border up the highway. There were so many of them they couldn't be stopped. They also just crossed via the canyons and backroads but our border fence drove them further into the country. And things are now enforced a bit better. Although I heard of American high school students being recruited to smuggle people across... *sigh* If they're caught, they're minors and don't get much of a punishment.

Now it is a longer journey on foot or you have to be smuggled in via one of the many tunnels we find, or an 18-wheeler, or a van jammed with 18 of your closest friends. Or else you get a visa and just stay past its expiration.

We used to have people complaining about the armies of illegals hiking through the canyons behind their houses. But I think that has gotten to be less.

As far as getting the documents... there's 12 million (at least) people who managed to get them. I doubt it is very difficult.

A bit off topic: We've had a large number of them set up a community of cardboard homes, no sanitation, in San Diego in a canyon. They lived there for YEARS! Someone finally decided to bring attention on it, the Minute Men I think. But basically their were a bunch of people living there, bathing in the creek, pooping in the underbrush, bringing in protitutes and working the agriculture in the area. It is potentially very dangerous because we have such a risk of wild fires in our area.

Here's a recent article (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_newrep-we_cant_stop.htm) about entry methods. I was looking for information about how much money it costs to get illegal documents but haven't found anything yet.

Here we go, $30 for a fake social security card. What a deal! http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3502003.html

These were a little more expensive but they were right from an employee at the social security administration: http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/ids.htm

I doubt it is very difficult.The types of amnesty Congress has been proposing -- similar to Reagan's amnesty program for agricultural workers in the 80s -- would not be difficult to apply for either. And you'd be here legally, never having to worry again.

If all those illegals could do it, they would, in a heartbeat.

I know that a lot of people disagreed with me last time I posted this, so I don't expect any different this time.

Generally, a nation wants to educate its citizens to raise their standard of living and then take immigrants to do the jobs its educated citizens no longer want to do. Special cases may arise where special skills are provided through immigration but generally the native population don't want to be overtaken by immigrants. If a large number of immigrants are taken in only at the top/middle of society (by putting a bottom limit on their wealth) then plenty of the native population will be overtaken and it might not be popular.

The problem with massive immigration is it lowers the value of workers. After all, why bother to pay a man who will only work for a certain amount / wants a certain amount of sickdays when you can easily pay someone who will work harder for less? Jobs become harder to find because employers have the upper hard - they don't have to hire you because you're 100% replaceable. That is the main problem people have with mass immigrations, in my opinion.

If you chose a gardener who charges you 10 bucks a week to mow your lawn, instead of the gardener who wants to charge you 50 bucks a week to mow your lawn, does that mean that you have the upper hand(as an employer)?

Are you exploiting the poor slob willing to work for 10 bucks a week? Does that make you feel guilty that you do not choose to hire the 50 bucks a week gardener?

Oh, and just in case you have not figured this out by now...

EVERYone is 100% replaceable.



Whenever I have ever met or heard from anyone that they felt that they were 'irreplaceable', they were out of that job within a few months.

That's true, Fyyr but it does take it to a higher level - just check your history books. This isn't always a bad thing which gridlocks us forever and ever oh no... (just look at the transcontinental railroad which was built on this type of labor) but it does mean that as a worker you are expected to work harder for less because if you don't, someone else will. I'm not referring to mowing lawns or even highly specialized jobs either (some people who do those types really aren't replaceable, or if they are, they're very hard to replace) I'm talking about unspecialized labor such as industrial jobs.

For instance - if you are unwilling to work for minimum wage because you cannot physically support your family on that wage (and anyone who believes that the minimum wage is enough to support you and a family is naive - plain and simple) and up until this point most jobs have been paying over that, but suddenly, there's an overabundance of workers and a shortage of jobs. You're desperate, and you've got to take that low-paying job because you've got no where else to go. You're caught in a loop, you see, because you can' afford to keep the job and still make ends meet, but you can't afford to leave it to find another because chances are there won't be another. And you've got no leverage to try and better your position because you are 100% replaceable, and there's more than enough people out there willing to do your job.

Sounds familiar? Welcome to the Great Depression. (No, I'm not saying this started it, but it was a consequence. I'm also not saying that if we allow citizenship to be bought that it will cause another Great Depression - I'm just pointing to the extreme example to illustrate my point)

It's not a matter of guilt. Saying that we should all hire the most expensive worker we can is a shallow response derived from an oversimplification of the problem. You and I both know that hiring the most expensive person to do a job is bull ****. That's not what my post is about.

Where does the notion that one can support a family on minimum wage come from?

inimum wage is only barely enough for a single person to eek out a poor existence.

That is why you don't start a family until you are able to get a better job that pays more. That is just common sense(though it is not common, of course).


Who, in their right mind tells ANYONE, "You know kid, you can start your family and pop out some puppies just as soon as you get a minimum wage job".

You should find those people, and shoot them in the face, right now. All of them. I, personally, have never met anyone who has said that, but certainly plenty of other people have. Shoot them in the face now.

Minimum wage is only barely enough for a single person to eek out a poor existence.Many of the Mexican immigrants support their entire family from seasonal (i.e., not full year) minimum wage agricultural jobs, and still have enough to send regular checks home.

It is very possible; you just have to dispense with your American notion of luxury.

But you're not just ditching "american luxury" you're ditching medical care, and any chance for moving up plus more. You're living an existance solely to benifit those at home... meaning that your living conditions aren't so great. (Please notice the understatement there!)

And as for the whole supporting a family on a minimun wage - I doubt that you'd find it easy to find someone who had not had sex with anyone until they were married and with a highly sucessfull career. **** happens. People don't tend to wake up and say "hey now, I can barely support myself. Let me start a family." And while smart couple do try to make sure that they have a secure enviroment for raising their children, it's not always that easy, or that simple.

12:14 here... time to stop ranting and go to bed =P

The notion of medical care for everybody is a relatively new, and novel notion. As so is the expectation of it.

Doctor and nursing care of the past was relatively reserved for the moderately wealthy.

I am poor and don't have insurance(yet), and don't rely on the ER(yet) for my healthcare. I don't expect that you all pay for me, and have paid for my own(more than my share) previously.

As to people breeding before they are able to take care of their own, I have certain strong opinions regarding that issue.

If people bring forth issue, before they are able to take care of it, or their family is not capable of taking care of it, they should not be allowed to bring forth issue. And society should be prepared and pay to prevent that from occurring.

Allowing people to breed, uncontrolled, without consequences to those individuals, but all the consequences fall on society in general is a rather silly and irrational way of thinking.

I will be developing soon, my fallopian and deferens reversible shunts. If any of you want to invest in the technologies, you may PM me.

But you're not just ditching "american luxury" you're ditching medical care, and any chance for moving up plus more.You can buy state-sponsored medical insurance in California for your children for $4 to $9 per month each.

You can buy a room of an apartment for $100-$200 per month (in an out of the way area).

You can buy food for $50 a month.

You can buy a beater for a few hundred dollars.

inimum wage in California is $7.50 in 2007, $8.00 in 2008. That's $15K / $16K, assuming you work only one job (they sometimes have two or three) and no overtime. You pay zero tax on this.

Do the math, you can get by, and they do, even with leftovers to send $100 or so per month to Mexico.

As for "moving up," well that's a function of education. You'll never "move up" if you're uneducated. But if you save just a little money you can live like a prince in Mexico. Unskilled laborers earn about $5 a day there, less than a tenth of what they can earn here.

As to people breeding before they are able to take care of their own, I have certain strong opinions regarding that issue.

As do I, but that doesn't mean everyone else does...

If you crowd 10 people into a 2 bedroom apartment you can afford a lot of things!

If you chose a gardener who charges you 10 bucks a week to mow your lawn, instead of the gardener who wants to charge you 50 bucks a week to mow your lawn, does that mean that you have the upper hand(as an employer)?

Are you exploiting the poor slob willing to work for 10 bucks a week? Does that make you feel guilty that you do not choose to hire the 50 bucks a week gardener?

No, but it creates a downward spiral which only stops when there are no gardeners because noone can afford to mow a lawn for 5 bucks a week...and then after a few months of mowing your own lawn, Eduardo swings on by and offers to mow your lawn for 80 bucks a week.