What should we do as far as immigration? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 04:39:56 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  What should we do as far as immigration? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What should we do as far as immigration?  (Read 8403 times)
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


« on: June 05, 2015, 07:34:51 PM »

My immigration stance?

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

My ancestors were accepted into this country as refugees fleeing vicious pogroms in Russia. Why would I ever abandon that most American of ideals, that this is a country that anyone can come to to build a new life?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2015, 11:19:56 AM »

My immigration stance?

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

My ancestors were accepted into this country as refugees fleeing vicious pogroms in Russia. Why would I ever abandon that most American of ideals, that this is a country that anyone can come to to build a new life?

How does that all that translate into actual legislative language and rules? 

The concern with unrestricted movement is that the equilibrium would be when standards of living and subsidies and transfer payments are about the same over the bulk of the population of the world, suggesting over time a rather large decline in the US standard of living, or at least its standard of living vis a vis the world's median.

It translates as my being aware that if the Immigration Law of 1924 had been in place 10 years earlier my ancestors wouldn't be able to come here. I'm very, very suspicious of immigration controls as a result. Who knows what talent we're losing right now by not opening the door wider to Syrian or South Sudanese refugees fleeing certain death at home to pursue a new life?

The refusal to actively recruit  suffering refugees to our shores and treating them like ordinary immigrants is a violation of this country's core values.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2015, 06:53:39 PM »

Opening the borders and allowing freedom of movement would result in a massive decline in living standards for the country 1) because we would be flooded with poor, which would bring down the average income (although I'm guessing they don't mind that, since it would be bringing up the individual incomes of the immigrants slightly) and 2) More importantly, a constant flow of desperate, low skilled workers would keep wages stagnated at best. How are you going to fight for $15 when there's a 10k people coming everyday willing to work for half?

I'm guessing all you leftists advocating for no borders aren't fans of austerity. Existing austerity programs will be nothing compared to the reduction in living standards caused by redistributing wealth between the United States and all of Latin America/the third world.

Not to mention it would make establishing a meaningful welfare state logistically impossible.

As I said before, I can't trust anyone whose arguments would've kept my unskilled refugee great-grandparents out of the country back then. It would be hugely hypocritical of me to turn my backs on Guatemalan refugees fleeing the most violent society in the Western Hemisphere and the likelihood of a gruesome death at home in hopes of a better life here when my own ancestors fled the pogroms for much the same reason. If it drags down wages, well, f**k wages. Preserving human life is more important. Asylum-seeking refugees from Eritrea and Syria and Sudan are more important than the difference between a $7.25 and a $10.10 minimum wage.

What kind of descendant of refugees would I be if I turned my back on those following in my great-grandparents' footsteps?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2015, 11:03:01 AM »

but it's not just the difference between a 7.27 minimum wage and a 10.10 minimum  wage.

It's also the difference between having universal health care and not having universal health care.

Yes, immigration is an American tradition. But so is not having a meaningful safety net. Those two things are linked.

Frankly, I don't care about "fixing" the safety net anywhere near as much as I care about preserving the USA as a place of safety and refuge for the persecuted and harried driven from their native lands. That is far, far more important than health care subsidies or Social Security benefits or anything else.

As I said earlier, it would be a betrayal of my most deeply-held core values to align myself with the heirs of those who tried to keep my impoverished, unskilled great-grandparents out of this country using much the same arguments you make now.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2015, 02:45:49 PM »

I hate this fake liberal nationalism about "American values." As if hypothetically America had never allowed immigrants you would be fine with keeping it that way. You want more immigrants because you want more immigrants, not because it's "an American tradition."

Me, I don't even pretend to be a nationalist. A country is only as good as the life it provides to its citizens.

If we allow immigrants in at the rate we do, our standard of living will remain the lowest in the first world.

Also, you're confusing the issue by bringing up refugees, which are a totally different issue from economic migrants.

I don't feel the two are separate issues at all. Certainly the debate last year about the Guatemalan refugee children in Arizona was treating them like economic immigrants despite their fleeing the most violent society in the Western Hemisphere looking for a new life in a society where they wouldn't have to worry about getting murdered in their sleep. Alternately, look at the coverage of the boat peoples in the Mediterranean, very little of which mentions that most of those immigrants are refugees from Eritrea and South Sudan, two of the most horrifying places in the world today with huge refugee crises. The talk about the people from Syria dislocated from their homes ends up with a lot of language about "not wanting them here" as well.

I don't feel there's anything "fake" about my championing of immigrants coming here. My great grandparents fled Russia with little in the way of talent and no English and thrived on this side. I will never, ever sympathize with anyone whose arguments would have locked the door to this country to them. It is a bright line for me, a position that betrays that the person holding it is utterly incompatible with my core values and principles.

Frankly, it is far, far more important that people are able to live without fear of getting gunned down in their sleep or murdered for being considered the wrong ethnicity in a civil war than what average wages and benefits are in this country. This country has always prided itself on being, to quote Cole Porter, "the kind of a nation/where people go from Poland to polo in one generation," and that  upwards mobility of people considered the impoverished refuse of the Old World into the comfortable class at the core of the United States is the very premise of what the American Dream is.

By the way, how dare you call my beliefs "false" in your opening sentence, as if you're implying dishonesty here. I've made it clear for years that a more open and welcoming immigration policy is a primary focus of mine, far outstripping wages or health insurance or pensions or anything else. It's pretty close to my #1 issue.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.