Last year I went to work for an Employment Agency. 9 times out of 10 Illegal immigrants were chosen for the job being offered. Less paper work? I wouldn't work for less than 7.00 an hr; and I ask a woman in my broken Spanish what she was earning and she was below mim wage. Btw she could not speak a word of English. Its not that we won't do the job~its all about money! Corporations are getting by with paying less than mim wages or scale wages.

Couple of things about Mexico such that immigration shouldn't matter to the neocons. Mexico as a country is what you want for our country. Low taxes, minimal government services, government corruption, a wide gap between rich and poor and no family planning.

The reason Mexico has so many people wanting to immigrate to the US is because their government has been for years what the neocons think will be best for our country. Leave the neocons in charge long enough and the two countries will looks the same and the immigrants will stop coming...no wall needed ...just unbridled corporotism and we will be them.

If an American needs a job, they shoudl be willing to take any job that provides them with a paycheck.

Exactly, Matt. Case in point: When I retired from the Air Force in 1996, the job I was doing in the military wasn't in high demand in the civilian sector. I took a job in a systems furniture installation company, and, other than a two-month stint at the USPS, I have been in the cubicle business now for just under ten years. I did little to no physical work for 20 years while serving my country and protecting Tom's right to be a moron, so a little physical labor did me good.

The pay wasn't great to start out--at 40, I was making $8.50/hr. However, I wasn't starving, was drawing a military pension, and the wife was doing okay as a government computer geek. the bills got to be a burden, but we're recovering, and I'll be moving on to bigger and better things next year when we go overseas.

My point? Well, about five years ago, my company started hiring Hispanic workers, as did a lot of businesses where I live. They work for less wages, and tend to drive our wages down. While I contend that some, if not all, of these guys are illegal, they do have "papers" that say otherwise. And I happen to get along with all of them. I have even tried to learn a little Spanish--I've mastered a lot of the cuss words so far.

We shouldn't excuse Americans able to work from working jobs that are available... nor should President Bush.

Spot on, Matt. These people on the welfare and unemployment rolls should be made to work, and if they still need government assistance, at least it will be less than the full bite. One of the major problems is the federal government, both parties, and their total neglect due to politics. The Dems ignore the issue because a vote's a vote, and the GOP ignores it because for economic reasons. We have a lot of boomers retiring, and the millions of illegals who do have "papers" and work, contribute to entitlement programs that they'll never be able to take advantage of.

We need to fix all of out entitlement programs, close our borders, and outlaw liberalism. Then and only then can our country be safe and pure.

God Bless America, and God Bless the Baltimore Orioles!!!

Oh muirgeo, you're such a tool. A funny tool, but a tool nonetheless. Do you think anyone here, other than the other parrots, cares what you post?

BTW, sorry for my wandering thoughts on my previous post. ADHD does that to an old man...

My girlfriend is Mexican-American. Several members of her extended family voted for Bush. I guess you could say that in that respect at least, they are representative of the Mexican American community in general. But if this immigration bill goes through as written, the word is they aren't likely to vote Republican again. It's not that they don't want anything done about illegal immigration, they do. Most of them, anyway. But every one of them that I've talked to is incensed at the way this bill proposes to go about it. I don't know how representative her family is of the Mexican-American community in general. I haven't seen any polls. But if they are, this bill has the makings of political suicide for the Republican party.

Wouldn't this problem be best solved by simply shoring up entitlement programs if we're concerned about illegal immigrants using public programs. And shouldn't we simply require appropriate reporting for employers.

I'm stuck in the middle. There ARE jobs out there that Americans are unwilling to do and that will keep our economy moving. True, an American will pick strawberries, but how much do you have to pay them to do it, and then how much would those strawberries then cost the consumer?

If we closed our borders as some seem to suggest, what does that hold for the future of a nation of immigrants? Do we only let in the immigrants that are in vogue?

Bottomline, I agree with Ricorun, this is the third rail as there is no way to please everyone, and in the process, you're gonna have a party desperate for power calling you either a racist or xenophobe or unwilling to tackle a problem. Mark my words, whatever ends up happening, you know where the Democrats will be, spouting off about how Republicans aren't solving the problem...without making an offer of a solution themselves.

The sad part is, President Bush is right, I work graveyard at an auto parts store, pay is decent at just below $8 an hour, but no one ever stays, because no one is willing to do the job, Start hiring hispanics and I bet that people will start sticking around.

Is it about money, partly I mean come on, our "unions" are just hurting us when they start demanding that workers get paid $20-$40 an hour for a $10-$15 per hour job. But 2/3 its about hiring someone that is willing to do the job, and lets face it, Hispanics are quite willing to work.

Its pretty funny that patriotic Americans who want to keep their country intact, should need to worry about 'political suicide' as Ricorun suggests. Political suicide from offending ILLEGALS??!! Wow, what a country, do you mean they are voting too Ricorun. I don't think the Republicans should pander for that vote...do you? If a half million are protesting in LA, I figure its a good spot to round a lot of them up and start the repatriotization. Besides there aren't many strawberries in LA. And as far as wawilliyo worrying about the future of immigrants; what a strawman that is....we are worrying here about ILLEGAL immigrants only. The process is to apply to become a true American legally...not some moocher, drug running, low wage, non English speaking, strawberry picker hanging in the shadows. If they come in legally, under the law, in quantities specified, Americans will welcome them as we have always done. Come in by swimming across and hiking the desert so you can use the medical system and having babies to become citizens as your prime mode of attaining oz; the majority of us will reject your cause.

Matt, I don't think President Bush was saying that americans are not capable of doing certian jobs. I think he was talking about the reality that there is little demand amongst americans to work these jobs. Of course I agree with your point that work is work no matter what the task or job description and that there is honor in all work. I may be wrong but if you speak to the employers of these jobs they may say that without the illegal workers, they would not be able to fill these jobs. In part, they may be saying so because they can take advantage of the illegal workers, which I see happening alot in the trucking business. I don't think President Bush had the intention that you are stating though. Why are there american unemployed who will not take a job flipping burgers at Burger King, even though their benefits have run out. Some choice not to compete as Bill O'Reilly has stated. Look at what the hurricane in New Orleans revealed. A large group of people who choose not to compete, who have waded in the comfort of victim hood for so long, that they have become paralyzed by it. How can they be "forced" to work. In no way do I make excuses for them in any way. I am just pointing to the reality that there are americans, no matter how bad off will not join the work force. Maybe it is the problem with entitlement programs as one poster noted. But this group seems to be with us always.

Matt, I don't think President Bush was saying that americans are not capable of doing certain jobs. I think he was talking about the reality that there is little demand amongst americans to work these jobs. Of course I agree with your point that work is work no matter what the task or job description and that there is honor in all work. I may be wrong but if you speak to the employers of these jobs they may say that without the illegal workers, they would not be able to fill these jobs. In part, they may be saying so because they can take advantage of the illegal workers, which I see happening alot in the trucking business. I don't think President Bush had the intention that you are stating though. Why are there american unemployed who will not take a job flipping burgers at Burger King, even though their benefits have run out. Some choose not to compete as Bill O'Reilly has stated. Look at what the hurricane in New Orleans revealed. A large group of people who choose not to compete, who have waded in the comfort of victim hood for so long, that they have become paralyzed by it. How can they be "forced" to work. In no way do I make excuses for them in any way. I am just pointing to the reality that there are americans, no matter how bad off will not join the work force. Maybe it is the problem with entitlement programs as one poster noted. But this group seems to be with us always.

Matt, I don't think President Bush was saying that americans are not capable of doing certain jobs.

I dont' think he's saying they're not capable.. he's letting them get waway with being snobby about what jobs they will do by saying immigrants will do the jobs they won't.

We definitely have a labor shortage in this country. That's what he really meant.

The problem is that too many people look down their noses at low income jobs. When I was growing up in East TExas in the fifties the majority of the farm work was done by African-Americans or high school boys after school and on the weekend. I loaded a lot of watermelons in the hot Texas sun for .50 per hour and was glad to do it.

One of the elite private K-12 schools in Dallas gives entrance tests to 4 year olds before they can enroll. One woman whose son failed the entrance exam was crying that her son would wind up being a plumber. The last time I had a plumber to my house he charged $65 for 10 minutes work.

I know of college graduates who are laid off that don't mind flipping burgers or delivering pizzas.

Dickdee,
It's not about pandering to illegal immigrants. The point is this: in 2004 the Republicans, and Bush in particular, made dramatic gains in the Latino vote. And if you think about it, it's a natural fit in many ways. The Latino community strongly mirror traditional conservative views in many areas -- they tend to be very religious, very pro-life, very pro-family, very hard-working people. Likewise, many in the Latino community are deeply grateful for their chance to pursue the American dream. They may be of Mexican, or Salvadoran, or Chilean, or some other heritage (and they are usually proud of that heritage in much the same way as I am proud of my Canuck heritage). But they are (as I am) even prouder to be Americans. In a way, I guess you could say that's the beauty of immigration. Immigrants, in general, are exceedingly grateful for the chance to get ahead -- a chance they never had in their country of origin. But, rightly or wrongly, the language and flavor of this House bill makes them very afraid.

As I have said before in various contexts, there is a difference between doing the right thing and doing it right. In this case, very few deny that it is right to do something about the illegal immigration problem. The real issue is doing it right. And as far as the Latino community is concerned, my impression is that the House bill isn't doing it right.

So... what IS the right way to address the issue? Frankly, I have no idea. And equally frankly, I have found no real concensus in my (admittedly limited) dealings with the Latino community. But maybe that's the point -- why on earth did the Congress decide it was a good idea to bring the issue up in an election year? First the spying issue, then the Dubai Ports issue, and now this. All have been wedge issues, but at least in the first two cases one could argue that they (congress) just had to react to the situation at hand. This issue is far more self-inflicted. Does the Republican congress have a death wish or something?

I highly doubt that the most radical proposal offered by Congress is going to be the one that passes--if any do. There will be compromises. However, regardless of whose party suffers, we need to get a grip on this now, or it will go by the way of the war on drugs and the war on poverty.

Speaking of the war on poverty, could any of you moonbats outline your exit strategy for this one? We've become occupiers; this war is over 40 years old. I know you have a plan, which is "there's a better way..."

I find it so hard to believe that everyone is making this sound like it is such a terrible thing. There are now laws on the books the say it is against the law to be in this country illegally. It has not to do with a legal immigrant. I you are here illegally then you need to leave, period. Do not let law breakers here. If we citizens break the law we are held accountable, no questions asked. Quit the nonsense with all the excuses for someone to break the law and to get away with it. There is no labor shortage, unemployed and welfare are capable of working. Build the fence for what the real reason is and that is the security of the country, nothing else. It would be alot cheaper then hiring a bunch more gov workers running around and not caring out the laws on the books already.

If you need an income you can't afford to picky can you?

The real issue is not income, but health insurance. If the unemployed would not lose the minimal care care that they have already by working, they would do anything, even a minimum wage part time job.

I hate to bring my own experience into the discussion, but it shows my point. After my brain hemorrhage (stroke) in 1978 in college, some people said that I should be 'on the dole' for the rest of my life. Not my conservative parents though, who said, "get a job, no matter what." Since I really didn't know the seriousness of my condition (in the first year a person can some some back, but after 12-18 months they plateau), I got a minimum wage part time job while I was trying to finish up the degree.

Big mistake. Since that 2-bit job was considered "gainful employment" after 9 months, I lost the minimal health care that the state provided. If I would have needed further surgery, or even a CT scan, I could never get it and would have very likely died (notice that, if anyone considers themselves to be right-to-lifers). I got the degree while trying to sell myself to 40 or 50 potential employers. None wanted me (so much for any "labor shortages").

Finally I got one (the AF) to take a chance and hire me, not only that but full time (therefore getting health insurance). The manager of my section, seeing how throughly exhausted I was at the end of the day, offered me less hours. I thanked him for his concern, but told him that if I worked less the 40 hours, I'd lose all health insurance. He said that he understood.

Back up to the big picture, I was stupid to have worked the part time job and thereby risking my life because of losing even the minimal state health care.

typo: "worked less the 40 hours" should have been "worked less than 40 hours"

Keefer,

The war on poverty has been quite successful since FDR intitiated it. Prior to his time as many as 40 -50 % of Americans lived under poverty....that was after 60 years of Republican rule which also lead up to the Great Depression. Now the rate is down to 11%...oh wait that was under Clinton.. I think Bush has it back up to 13 %.
see;
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n1/v66n1p1c4.gif

Now of course poverty rates are much higher in the Red States but I'm mostly talking about the Country as a whole.

see:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/censpov.html

*Shakes head*

I HATE that line. Work that Americans won't do is a total BS line. Heck have you seen Dirty Jobs? Seriously there are some seriously WIERD jobs out there that folks do. I know I've done some wierd jobs in my life as well (putting plastic bags on plants after picking their flowers for testing? What?) and the basic point is to get the experience to move onto other jobs.

As for off shift work, there are some folks like myself who can't STAND daylight shifts. Working 9-5 would kill me because I don't do mornings. I'm dead before noon and if I'm up during that time my entire day is shot. So I work Swings or Mids and I am much happier. I know I'm not the only one too. Different strokes for different folks after all.

Finally, what is wrong with enforcing or making enforcable the law? We call them illegals for a reason, they've broken the law by coming here wrongly. One thing I think is being overlooked in this discussion though is how hard is it to come here legally? I'm all for these folks coming in, and not just mexicans, the Chinese are a major illegal population too. I know my family works for years to bring in family and friends from China legaly. From what I can tell it's a pain in the arse and a long process. Any way of making it easier and make more sense?

Basically I think there are three things to this whole deal that need to be addressed. Protecting the border, removing the illegals already here and acutally fining the companies that hire them, and making it easier or at least easier to figure out how to come in legally.

My family runs a fruit farm here in the northeast. We have had a number of Mexicans work on the farm for the last 10 years. You can not get anyone else to do the work. As a very rural area, transportation is a big problem for many non illegals. Now when these Mexicans do show up (the same ones over the last 10 years) they always have an SS card, etc. Not sure what else to check. The biggest problem in fruit farming biz is when the crop is ready, it's ready and will not hang on the trees forever. I'm only talking about 3-6 Mexicans for a 3 month period. They say they go back "home" in the winter. Home is sometimes Mexico but I don't think they all go.

Unions - the lazy mans road to retirement.

Thanks, muirgeo, for the info, but how about leaving out the talking points about how "red states" are poor, and "blue states" have all the wealth. It's condescending. Why does everything have to be a competition with you jerk moonbats? if you'd learn to work with others, rather than crave power all the time, some of this divisiveness might go away.

And oh, BTW, poverty numbers are the same as poll numbers, in my book. the "two Americas" didn't work in '04, did it?

Well Keefer maybe you should ask yourself what makes them Red States and what makes them poor states....could be a link there you know.

If I'm right and it is related to political philosophy...then condescending is too good for it. It needs something even harsher because those are real people living in poverty in those red states.....Don't you worry however because Howard Dean is making it his point to show such graphs of poverty and red stateness to all the voters in the Red States...I think you might be surprised this fall.

muirgeo,

The "war on poverty" has been successful because of the success of the American economy under the principles of free market and capitalism!

It is the liberal's "war on wealth and success" that bothers me. They are the modern reincarnation of "Robbing Hood" -- take form the workers and give to those who WILL NOT WORK! Now they want to bring in millions of ILLEGAL workers to do the work their "welfare careerists" won't! The liberal mindset had created a nation where many of the people simply will not work, not that they can't work or aren't capable, they just WILL NOT WORK. Nor why should they when the liberals can take the taxes from those who do to pay those who don't, and who obviously willing vote to keep liberals in office and their "benefits".

If the liberal programs are so successful and good, then why was it that a thriving Democrat stronghold like New Orleans couldn't even figure how to get their citizens out of harms way before Kartina hit? Why did the sit around and wait for the federal government to do what they should have done? Some say all of the poor just couldn't afford to take care of themselves, so where were their Democratic leaders with their open pocketbooks?

And now, why aren't all of those same people out helping rebuilding their city? Why do we need illegal workers to do it for them and then hear the complaints about illegal workers taking the "good" reconstruction jobs?

AAR

Posted by: AAR
take form the workers and give to those who WILL NOT WORK!

When I was paralyzed, I was forced to get a job - and I got a job. No Republican ever helped me, I did it all myself through "hard work and good old fashioned values." You know, those "values" that conservatives preach but never practice. When I needed money, I had to work for it; but when conservatives want more money, they don't work for it, they just get tax cuts. They get a fatter paycheck without working one hour overtime, because, in your words, they WILL NOT WORK! If they want more money, instead of getting another tax cut, why don't they just get a job? But they WILL NOT WORK! This generation is so lazy that they can't even tie their shoes without having an extra hand. Why can't they tie their shoes with one hand? I can, so what's their problem? Are they more disabled than me? Looks like it's just because they WILL NOT WORK! I never had a tax cut, I work for my money. Why can't they? Again, are they more disabled than me? Maybe they are, something along the lines of being MORALLY retarded: greedy but lazy!

AAR,

I don't think honest liberals are wanting to transfer wealth. I think they have a desire for a fair system. Now the wealthy transfer wealth off the backs of laborers.

Economic productivity goes up because of hard working average Americans but income and net wealth gains go almost exclusively to the already wealthy. Why do you consider that not a problem?
I agree that taxing the rich to "redistribute wealth" is not the answer but a fair electoral system and policy system that didn't grant favor to the wealthy and their corporations at the expense of the workers is not fair either and amounts to an upward transfer of wealth and a usurpation of markets and democracy.

Robert,

If what you said is true, you are to be commended for getting out and helping yourself rather than relying on others to do it for you. That is the type of work ethic and old fashioned values that built this nation. Unfortunately, though, our liberal welfare system has destroyed much of that!

Yes the majority of Americans do work to "earn" their living, but unfortunately, there are millions of other Americans who could work but who don't or won't. Why should they? With all of the welfare and entitlement programs around, they don't need to work! Instead they can sit back and draw their welfare check, or receive some other government "assistance" rather than getting a job. Why should they work overtime or take a second job like people used to do if the government will pay them welfare instead?

I see help wanted signs and job offers everywhere. Why do we need to bring in millions of illegal immigrants to do the work that Americans won't do? Why? Because "the system" makes it all too easy for many of those who could work to draw welfare instead! It's not that many could not do these jobs; it's that they don't want to do them! Should a person who can work be permitted to draw welfare because they don't want to do the jobs that are available? Why should others have to work longer and harder to pay higher taxes to support those who don't want to do the work that's available?

Yes, there are people who legitimately need help, or who can't work to feed, clothe, or house themselves? But there are also millions of others who simply will not work, will not work extra hours, or will not take a second job to support themselves and their families because the welfare system takes care of them. I see it, read about it, and hear about it all the time. I see people drawing various types of welfare who are more than capable of working overtime or a second job, but why should they? I've stood in check-out lines many times purchasing a lower cut of meat or a generic item while others in line use their food stamps to buy premium meats and use their cash to buy cigarettes and other items that can't be purchased with food stamps. I can't afford the higher priced item, but yet I must pay taxes so others can!

You say when conservatives want more money, they don't work for it, they just get tax cuts.

First) I disagree with your statement that conservatives don't work. You obviously realize there is no rational or logical basis for that statement. The fact is, most of the people on extended welfare, the welfare careerists, are Democrats. Most Democrats are not conservatives!

Second) That very statement shows that you recognize that conservatives do work... because they pay taxes!

A person doesn't get a tax cut unless they work or earn money in some manner and pay taxes in the first place. Now, why then shouldn't a person who has worked to earn their money get to spend most of it themselves? Why should that person give it all to the government in taxes so liberals can give it to their own worthy causes? Why should taxpayers have to work extra hours so they can make more money for the liberals to tax and take? What makes liberals so special that they have the right to take what others work hard to earn just so the liberals can give it to those whom they believe are more deserving?

The way I see it, liberals should pay no taxes. If liberals practice what they preach, they would live on a small portion of their earnings and donate the rest to those "good and worthwhile" causes. They should even work two jobs to make even more money to give to those causes. They would not pay taxes because they would have given their earnings to others who need it more than they do. In reality, however, this isn't the case. Look around at all of the wealthy liberals -- the ones who have more money than I could hope to see in multiple lifetimes. Yet they would be among the first to raise my taxes to give to their causes!

Why would you want to work hard to earn your money only to pay more of it in taxes to support those who can work but won't? Why do liberals object to making sure that those drawing welfare really are those who deserve and need it? Why do liberals object to making sure that people who can work do so?

muirgeo,

You say liberals don't want to "transfer" wealth and that the "wealthy transfer wealth off the backs of laborers".

I don't agree with your statement.

In a capitalist society, wealth is transferred through the open, free, and competitive marketplace. Yes, people make money from the work of others, but those workers (laborers) also take a portion of that wealth in exchange for what they do. Those (employers, wealthy) who have money (wealth) hire those (workers) who want and need that money. The money (wealth) is transferred from the employers (wealthy) to those (workers) who want or need it as payment for the work they do, or for providing a service, product, or some other benefit to the employer.

What do you want those who have money to do? Just hand it over to those who, in your opinion, "need" it more? In fact, that's exactly what liberals want! After all, liberals have many "good and worthwhile" uses for our money and that makes it the "proper" and "moral" thing to do! Of course liberals do want to do it "legally" through exorbitant taxes.

Why should a person work to earn a living if the government provides a living for them? ...They won't!

Why should a person work hard to achieve wealth if the government takes away that wealth through taxes and redistributes it to others who did not work to earn it? ...They won't!

If no one works, then who will pay the taxes for the liberals to take? ...No one!

AAR

Posted by: AAR

If what you said is true, you are to be commended for getting out and helping yourself rather than relying on others to do it for you. That is the type of work ethic and old fashioned values that built this nation.

Yes, my story is true, very strange but true none the less. I really don't deserve anyone's respect for my self-reliance; I only did what I did because at each point along the path it seemed like it was the most logical move to make then, job-wise. Looking back at my life, now that I'm old, it seems to be somewhat of a waste. Instead of pursuing my true calling as a writer, I spent almost all of time, energy, and the little brain-power I still had on working and misc chores for so many years; years that I can never get back.

Yes, there are people who legitimately need help, or who can't work to feed, clothe, or house themselves?

I have a some problem with the idea of helping only the "truly needy." It sounds good, but who decides who is "truly needy"? I've been on the bottom and I've seen a lot of twisting of that term to mean whoever the powerful want to call the "truly needy" regardless of reality, so I'd rather junk the whole concept. Instead, especially in times of large deficits, the money would be better spent on (1) free health care for all, at least for catastophic illness (a week in the ICU costs as much as good house), and (2) free education for all (it is an investment that will always pay off).

The way I see it, liberals should pay no taxes. If liberals practice what they preach, they would live on a small portion of their earnings and donate the rest to those "good and worthwhile" causes. They should even work two jobs to make even more money to give to those causes. They would not pay taxes because they would have given their earnings to others who need it more than they do. In reality, however, this isn't the case. Look around at all of the wealthy liberals -- the ones who have more money than I could hope to see in multiple lifetimes.

Scripture demands payment of taxes in no uncertain terms. I'm a liberal and in my highest income period (1989-2004, when I was averaging about 50K a year), I was generally living off 1/3, saving 1/3, and giving 1/3 away. Now that my income has been drastistically been cut I spend less on myself, give less, and save nothing. I really don't want a new job though, because I'd rather use whatever time is left me for writing, hopefully I can create something worthwhile to leave behind me.

Robert,

I hope that your efforts have not a waste of time. Somehow, I don't think they have been.

Sometimes we just can't see the true results of our efforts or our influence on others.

Best of luck in all of your endeavors!!!

AAR

Thank you! And you too.