Help Save The US preliminary notes

| | Comments (21) | TrackBacks (0)

The whole immigration issue is complicated, granted. Problems exist in neighborhoods and supposedly they can only be solved by our fearless leaders in the federal government.

But we can stipulate a few basic requirements.

Americanization must occur. Immigrants must learn English and decide to become Americans. Otherwise, they are visitors, and guests are under a completely different category. If you don't consider yourselves Americans, or at least budding Americans, don't expect to be taken under America's wing.

You can't come to America and go on welfare. It makes no sense. We, who pay taxes, are trying to get people OFF welfare. Importing new welfare recipients is economic and cultural suicide. With millions of people coming across the US southern border every year we can be looking at one mother of a problem if the majority of the new arrivals are going on the dole.

You must be citizens. Otherwise, you will be paid under the table and current citizens will be at a huge disadvantage, whether the jobs be in retail, agriculture or whatever.

Employers who game the system by hiring illegal workers need to be punished. The punishment should be draconian because the impact on lower-skilled American citizens is severe.

Employment laws need to be upheld. How hard is this to understand?

Importing poverty is going to be an unmitigated disaster for those who are least able to deal with it.

Immigrants and their families now comprise one out of four poor Americans. Poor immigrants pay little in taxes and consume large levels of government services including medical care, welfare, and public education. The increase in poverty due to immigration can impose costs well beyond the immediate cost of current welfare bene­fits for immigrants. By magnifying the public perception of poverty, immigration can create political leverage for new anti-poverty programs. Immigration-induced poverty can easily have spillover effects resulting in new govern­ment entitlements for all poor Americans...

The U.S. offers enormous economic opportunities and societal benefits. Hundreds of millions more people would immigrate to the U.S. if they had the opportunity. Given this context, the U.S. must be selective in its immigration policy. Policymakers must ensure that the interaction of welfare and immigration does not expand the welfare-dependent population, thereby hindering rather than helping immigrants and imposing large costs on American society.

U.S. immigration policy should encourage high-skill immigration and strictly limit low-skill immigration. In gen­eral, government policy should limit immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, avoiding those who will increase poverty and impose new costs on overburdened U.S. taxpayers.

This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is a simple question of human rights. How much are we going to punish the American blue collar worker and the American taxpayer?

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Help Save The US preliminary notes.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Stay Puft Marshmallow Man said:

very interesting.

here's to points:

I've read stuff about undocumented immigrants refusing to see a doctor for fear of being deported. Often, an undocumented worker wont see a doctor until he's seriously ill, at which he needs emergency attention, which is the most expensive kind. It's actually cheaper to offer preventive treatment to people than to wait until they're on their deathbed to help them. The alternative is to insist on doctors refusing to see seriously sick people on the grounds that they don't have legal status in the country, which certainly isn't WJWD.

The other thing is about only letting in skilled workers. Who are the skilled workers in other countries? The upper class, often. The more fortunate part of the population who could afford schooling, who had access to the right resources to study some technology, or medicine, or whatever. By only allowing 'skilled' workers in, we'll cease to be the land of opportunity and turn into a rich boys club; the world's largest gated community. At the same time, only the most educated people in the developing world will be able to come to America. While that might be nice for us in the short term, it could lead to a sort of brain drain in other countries, further slowing development, and in the end making our immigration problems worse.

Had Enough said:

What we are experiencing is not immigration. It is encouraged and deliberate

While all invaders are not from Mexico, the majority is. The mexican government distributed books in comic book form advising their citizens when, how and the best times to illegally cross the border.

The books also tells them how to lay low and avoid police,etc. It also tells them how to obtain services, etc.

They also provide a survival kit to them.

Additionally, there is a large portion of these people that believe that the majority of this country is still theirs and that they will again own it.

Just recently, A head bank official in mexico made a public statement that this so called migration is hurting mexico and that the US should put an end to it. He said mexico needs to start providing and helping their people in Their country. They need to create jobs and boost their own economy themselves.

Our lawmakers do not care about the hardships or job loss to citizens that have been affected by this invasion as long as big business has their cheap labor.

After all, bush along with mexico and canada intend on putting our truckers and port workers out of work soon.

The mine owners now want spanish in the mines.

Illegals are starting businesses everywhere and also employing illegals.

mexico and the illegals have no fear or respect of this country. Main objective: suck us dry one way or the other.

bush started out with a guest worker program, teddy & co. blew it up into citizenship even for felons.

Notice: Mexicans Do Not Want To Work The Fields Anymore! They Want All The Trade Jobs And Other Jobs That Built The Middle Class Of This Country.

Just recently the border patrol estimated that there are 30 million illegals here. When was the last time that a country sent 30 million of their people into another country in the middle of the night and the receiving country ignored it?

People should remember that fox has benefited well durung his presidency. He managed to encourage his poor, criminals and sick to illegally enter another country to be taken care of without resistance. His budget was balanced this year, he proudly announced.

Had Enough said:

The illegals have never been denied medical care. You have footed the bills for the prenatal and birth of over 300,000 anchor babies each year.

bush saw to it that catholic charities and others in what he calls faith based organizations got plenty of money for clinics, medical care, etc. for the illegals.

They have always used our emergency rooms for a cold or stubbed toe or whatever. That is why over 80 hospitals in CA went bankrupt.

The only way they may have refused care was to the face of authority.

I know someone (citizen)who a few months back was very sick and out of work with no insurance. No doctor would give them an appointment. They resorted to the free clinics and no one hardly spoke English at all and their inquiries and calls were never returned.

They finally went to the emergency room and have been harassed for the money every since. Still not working full time.

I also had a neighbor that was unemployed and sprained her foot and needed care. She also could not get a doctor to see her. She went to social services. Since she had a home, she did not qualify for medical help even though she was two months behind on the mortgage. She said there was nothing but hispanics at the social services offices.

I have been told that when you call a doctor, you are first asked if you have insurance. If you say no, they tell you to contact the free clinic.

Now to the people that do not mind paying the medical bills of the illegals you can contact me for the bills of my friends.

We have no responsiblity to illegal aliens. If they are sick, send them home for treatment. I have heard that mexico has excellent hospitals. The only difference is that here they get the care free and in mexico if they are uninsured they must give blood for their services.

Had Enough said:

Stay Puft, sounds like the washington post or cbs and others. They search for those kind of stories.

They never pull a negative story about ilegals off the newswire.

DC has nothing but media blackout when it comes to illegals. If you read papers in CA, AZ, WA, NV, etc. you will find our local stories, but not here.

Roci said:

As long as we have the 14th ammendment, immigration will be broken in the USA.

The debate has to start with what it takes to be an American. Being born here of foreign parents cannot be enough. This ammendment was passed to grant citizenship to former slaves. It has not been needed for over 100 years.

zimzo said:

Joe, you asked me in another thread how your rhetoric evokes the racist anti-immigrant rhetoric of the past. Stay Puft offered the example of Henry Ford's anti-Semitic rhetoric. But that is just one example of a long history of American Nativism. Nothing you have said is new except that your fear-mongering is now primarily aimed at Latinos instead of Irish, Germans or Chinese, and instead of warnings about the sedition Catholics you substitute Muslims. But it's the same old rhetoric, which is outlined in detail in Roger Daiels' Coming to America:

Claims that immigrants were refusing to learn English and the damage that was doing to society go all the way back to the 1750s and complaints about Germans and their language and culture in Pennsylvania. Can you guess who wrote this?:

"Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion. Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People inthe World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? why increase the Sons of Africa, by planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely White and Red?"

That was Benjamin Frenklin, believe it or not. Even in his day he got so much criticism for writing this that these passages were deleted from later editions of "Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind." Of course, he was wrong about German immigrants just as you are wrong about Latino immigrants.

This is just one example. All of your other fulminations about illegal immigrants--that they are responsible for a disproportionate number of crimes, that they wreak economic devastation, that they are "unmeltable"--have all been said about immigrants for the last 200 years and has not only been demonstrated to be false then, they are false now.

Just to take one of the straw men you knock down. Illegal immigrants don't come here and go on welfare immediately because illegal immigrants are not eligible for welfare and legal immigrants have to be residents for at least 5 years to be elgible and even then under strict guidelines. Finally, numerous studies show that the idea that immigrants have a negative impact on the economy is a myth. Their impact is actually negligible. I have already linked to some of these studies in our previous discussions and don't have time to find them now. But if you go to sources other than the biased right-wing sources you always seem to rely on, you will find that most economists believe this to be true.

Zimzo, better references would be John Higham's "Strangers in the Land", Ray Allen Billington's "The Protestant Crusade" and Gustavus Myers' "History of Bigotry in the US". Also, David Mark Chalmers' "Hooded Americanism", Seymour Martin Lipset's "The Politics of Unreason" and Edwin Newman's "The Hate Reader". Richard Hofstadter's magnificent essay "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" is also required reading (it has sort of a transposed relevance to modern politics, but that's an argument for another day). I've read all of the above numerous times, along with literally hundreds of articles and partial books on topics related to immigration and ethnicity in America. John J. Miller's "Unmaking of Americans" makes a very similar point to the one you are making.

So I know the argument and the history, and I also know there are statistical differences in what is happening today.

That being said, I don't think you understand my full take on this topic. Enforcement happens to be the part of the puzzle which, in my view, needs to be emphasized, but assimilation is another huge part of it. Look for quotes by Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin D Roosevelt in google. By "Help Save The US" I do not mean via deportation.

I am off to a meeting, unfortunately, so can't expound further for now. The speaker, by the way, is Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, who - if you get the chance - has compiled a plethora of data on current immigration.

If you really want the truth, which I believe you do, you have to take into account the work by Camarota and a few others. None are so blind as those who will not see.

If I have the energy late tonight I will report on the meeting, but that's a big if.

Kevin said:

every time Enough comments my eyes turn into spinning red spirals

Had Enough said:

Tax increases coming - Do you mind supporting Hispanic Family Values?

Runaway illegitimacy is creating a new U.S. underclass.

I know too many Citizens that I rather see my tax money spent on.

It is out of control now, what about 5, 10, 15 years from now.

Maybe I'll check out Austrailia or the new volcanic island that just formed in the Pacific or hopefully the First State that successfully passes laws and enforces them against illegal aliens.

zimzo said:

Joe, I'm a little confused. First you challenge me to demonstrate how your rhetoric resembles racist nativist rhetoric of the pass. I do so and then you admit that you are very familiar with this rhetoric and in fact that may be why it sounds so derivative but you move the goalposts and say, "So I know the argument and the history, and I also know there are statistical differences in what is happening today." So now basically your argument is that while your rhetoric sounds like nativist rhetoric of the past this time it's justified because of "statistical differences"? Uh, OK.

Had Enough, although like Kevin I cannot read what you write anymore because my eyes start spinning and I begin to feel dizzy, I really admire your complete lack of preoccupation with how crazy you sound.

Zimzo, there are HUGE differences between what happened between 1835 and the 1920s and what is happening today. That's the point. Isn't that topic what interests you, anyway?

I'm sure I have uttered sentences similar to those uttered by Barbra Streisand; that does not make me a wonderful singer with an IQ of 3.

zimzo said:

That wasn't the point I was challenged to make. You said, "Whether you know one single thing about my "rhetoric" or the rhetoric "from the past", I will give you bonus points if you can document either." Now you admit that your rhetoric sounds like nativist rhetoric of the past but you claim the situation is somehow "different." So the real point is when so many people of the past have complained of immigrants being "unmeltable," not learning our language or culture, being criminals and ruining the economy, all of which turned out not to be true, should we believe that this time it's different, especially since there is no evidence that immigrants are learning English, committing crimes or harming the economy any more than immigrants of the past did?

Thank you, THAT is the right question. I'll answer it when I get home because right now duty calls.

PJGoober said:

UC Irvine study:

Study sheds light on how young adult children of immigrants assimilate

Largest, longest study of children of immigrants reveals certain groups are left behind

Irvine, Calif., October 4, 2006
While the vast majority of young adult children of immigrants experience upward economic and social mobility, a new study finds that a significant minority are suffering from lower levels of education, lower incomes, higher birth rates and higher levels of incarceration. Furthermore, it is the U.S.-born children of Mexican, Haitian and West Indian immigrants who experience these problems in the largest proportions.

The study, led by sociologists Rubén G. Rumbaut of UC Irvine and Alejandro Portes of Princeton University, appears online this week in the Migration Information Source. The largest and longest-running study of children of immigrants yet conducted, the study also confirms the critical importance of education.

“The greatest educational disadvantage is found among children of Mexican immigrants and Laotian and Cambodian refugees in our sample – close to 40 percent of whom did not go beyond a high school diploma,” said Rumbaut. “Education is the key to successful upward mobility among children of immigrants, so the discrepancies that emerge in educational achievement among immigrant groups tend to persist in trends for income, employment and incarceration.”

The researchers also point to the influence of human capital (the skills and education of immigrant parents) as well as family structure, racial prejudice and government policies toward certain immigrant groups – particularly the undocumented – that influence this “downward assimilation” process.

The researchers found that children of Laotian and Cambodian Americans as well as Haitian Americans had the lowest median annual household income at just over $25,000. They were followed closely by Mexican American families, which had a median annual household income of about $30,000. On the other end of the spectrum, children of upper-middle-class Cuban exiles in Southern Florida reported a household income of more than $70,000, and Filipino Americans in Southern California had more than $64,000, followed by Chinese immigrants.

Furthermore, the study found that the most educationally and economically disadvantaged children of immigrants were most likely to have children of their own at a young age, compounding their difficulties at pursuing higher education. When surveyed at the average age of 24, none of the Chinese Americans had children, while in contrast 25 percent of Haitians, West Indians, Laotians and Cambodians did, as did 41 percent of Mexican American young adults.

Differences in arrest and incarceration rates are also noteworthy, particularly among second-generation, U.S.-born, males. While only 10 percent of second-generation immigrant males in the survey had been incarcerated, that figure jumped to 20 percent among West Indian and Mexican American youths.

“Unfortunately, these trends perpetuate the racial and ethnic stereotypes that contributed to their situation in the first place,” Rumbaut said. “On the positive side, we see that children of immigrant families with little money and low human capital can move forward positively in American society. But there is clearly a minority segment among the native-born children of some immigrant groups that is getting caught in a cycle of downward mobility, and we need to understand the trends that drive this process.”

There are more than 30 million U.S.-born children of immigrants. Rumbaut is continuing to explore the major events influencing the social outcomes of the immigrant second generation, focusing on early childbirth for women and incarceration among men.

About the Study: The surveys were conducted over more than 10 years with random samples representing 77 different nationalities originally drawn in 1991 in San Diego, Calif., and Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., of more than 5,000 respondents who were then in junior high school, The most recent surveys were conducted from 2001 to 2004 when the respondents were between the ages of 23 and 27. The surveys are part of the Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study, which was designed to examine the in-depth interaction between immigrant parents and their children and the evolution of the young from adolescence into early adulthood. Results from the CILS surveys provide the most compelling current evidence to date of how the second generation adapts – from education and income to unemployment, family formation and incarceration. The study was funded with support from the Russell Sage Foundation. More:

PJGoober said:

"Nothing you have said is new except that your fear-mongering is now primarily aimed at Latinos instead of Irish, Germans or Chines"

Yeh... right. People from a hundred years ago couldn't possibly have as sophisticated analysis as we do today. We have reams of socio economic data to poor over. Would you use the views of copernicus in a discussion about astronomy? It would be totally irrelevent because we have MODERN data.

Also, did jews, italians, or irish have an illigitimacy rate of 45 % ? Hispanics do:

You know the horrible life outcomes illegitamcy is correlated with. Thats not the worst of it though. What is bad is, has anyone ever heard of a groups illegitimacy rate improving? That seems to be something that only gets worse. See? Historical comparisons from over a hundred years ago are ludicrous. We face a MODERN, UNIQUE situation.

Kevin said:

Zim, here's another link to

From their bio: "City Journal offers a stimulating mix of hard-headed practicality and cutting-edge theory, with articles on everything from school financing, policing strategy, and welfare policy to urban architecture, family policy, and the latest theorizing emanating from the law schools, the charitable foundations, even the schools of public health. Since urban policy encompasses almost all domestic policy questions, as well as the largest issues of our culture and society, the magazine views its canvas as very broad indeed. The magazine holds itself to the highest intellectual, journalistic, and literary standards, aiming to produce intelligent and absorbing reading for intelligent and discerning readers."

The canvas is broad, but the slant is narrow.

They're owned by the Manhattan Institute (, "a think tank whose mission is to develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility" (by their Mission Statement).

All language is motivated.

Kevin said:

a good article: _________

zimzo said:

Kevin is right. It's amazing how the only evidence you guys can find to back up what you say comes from the same extreme right-wing sources. The link from City Journal goes to an article by Heather MacDonald, the same person who claimed there was a "Illegal Alien crime wave" and wrote this immortal line "Some of the most violent criminals at large today are illegal aliens" based on no evidence but her own sweat-drenched nightmares. This is the same Heather MacDonald who thinks that there hasn't been enough torture of inmates at Guantanamo although 50% of the inmates there, including children, were released because they were found to be innocent.

I don't even think you read the other study, which is about the impact of poverty on education and assimilation. Of course, the solution to this problem is to grant amnesty to those immigrants who are already here, not drive them deeper into poverty by hounding their employers. It's always amazing to me how some people who call themselves Christians and claim to support family values care so little about the children of immigrants, the poor or anyone else who is less fortunate than they are.

pjgoober said:

"Kevin is right. It's amazing how the only evidence you guys can find to back up what you say comes from the same extreme right-wing sources."

The U.S. government Center for Disease control is not an extreme right-wing source. Here is a report from 2002. It clearly states the hispanic illegitamcy rate at 43.5% on Table 19 on page 57 of National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 52, Number 10.

That report is from 2002, which explains the tiny discrepancy from Heather MacDonald's 45% number.

The city-journal says during the article she got the data from the CDC. All who call her a liar are free to go to the CDC and get the correct data that the author allegedly lied about. You should do a bit of research before you call her or anyone a liar (at least try 5 seconds of googling).

You wonder why immigration restrictionists have to cite "extreme right wing sources". But that is circular logic, because anyone who mentions data like the hispanic illegitimacy rate in public automatically becomes labeled an "extreme right wing source". The other side of the coin is that Left wing sources just don't care to cite it.

Now that I (hopefully) convinced you of the hispanic illegitamacy rate, I ask you again why the following is not true:

1. Illegitimacy rates are correlated with horrible life outcomes.

2. Illegitimacy rates have *so far* generally increased for the last half century. Barring short term anomalies, this is the trend.

3. A massive societal campaign for marriage is the only way to decrease illegitimacy, that doesn't make you too popular with leftists. It probably makes you an "extreme right-wing source". You'd be critized for demonizing single mothers. You'd be called a religious fundamentalist. You'd probably be called a racist.

Conclusion: 1) How do we help hispanics without decreasing illegitimacy. 2) How in God's name do we decrease illegitimacy in the age of political correctness?

"Of course, the solution to this problem is to grant amnesty to those immigrants who are already here, not drive them deeper into poverty by hounding their employers."

The upper bound on how far amnesty could uplift illegals is to the position of hispanic legal immigrants. That is still pretty poor. That, by itself, would be better for american crime-rates, welfare use rates, illegitamcy rates etc, but unfortunately it would lead to more immigration. Amnesty will attract more illegals. And most amnesty proponents tout a guest worker program. The negative effect of that on american crime rates, poverty, etc. Note that the high mexican american incarceration rate of 5.9% cited by Linda Chavez above has NOTHING to do with illegal immigration (they are citizens). Amnesty is not a pancea for anything, it is just more hair of the dog that bit you.

"there is no evidence that immigrants are learning English, committing crimes or harming the economy any more than immigrants of the past did?"

You are right, immigrants don't commit more crime. But generations after that are a different story as Linda Chavez, a big amnesty and guest worker program proponent says:

Before Bashing Immigrants, Get The Facts Straight
"Only .7 percent of Mexican-born males were in prison or jail, compared with 3.51 percent of all U.S.-born males, which includes 1.71 percent of non-Hispanic whites, 11.6 percent of blacks and 5.9 percent of Mexican Americans."

Thats right, Mexican americans are incarcerated at 8.42 times the rate of Mexican immigrants. But Mexican immigrants lead to Mexican americans through procreation, and furthermore, hispanics procreate at a much higher rate than other immigrants, thus excaberating the effect of hispanic immigration.

From UC Irvine study above:
"When surveyed at the average age of 24, none of the Chinese Americans had children, while in contrast 25 percent of Haitians, West Indians, Laotians and Cambodians did, as did 41 percent of Mexican American young adults."

Thus, each generation of immigrant descended people (since 1965) is more mexican than the last. Thus, figures citing low immigrant crime are implicitly (though not technically) misleading, due to the fact that the crime rate outcomes of the *descendents* of hispanic is what really matters for america's future (immigrants last merely a life-time, thier descendents last forever) due to thier massive numbers and outsized fertility compared to other immigrants. A 5.9% incarceration rate for Mexican Americans bodes ill for americas future.

pjgoober said:

"The upper bound on how far amnesty could uplift illegals is to the position of hispanic legal immigrants."

should have read:
""The upper bound on how far amnesty could uplift hispanic illegals is to the position of hispanic legal immigrants."

zimzo said:

It certainly is better to work from statistics from a legitimate source, but it still depends on how you interpret them. First of all, note that MacDonald skips over the black illegitimacy rate, which is 68.2%. So if you are going to argue about the problems of illegitimacy in the U.S. Hispanics are certainly not the main problem.

But even if you acknowledge that illegitimacy is a problem in Hispanic populations, it is still not largely as a result of immigration. Hispanic illegitimacy rates are skewed by the high rate of Puerto Rican out-of-wedlock births. On Table 14 you can see that the rate for Puerto Ricans is 59.1%, for Mexicans 42.1%. And the rate for Mexican mothers born in the United States and born outside the United Staes is significantly different. For Mexican mothers born in the U.S. the rate is 47.5% and for Mexican mothers born outside the U.S. it is 39%.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance


Technorati search

» Blogs that link here