Immigration: DU vs. Freeperland

[pampango]

This proposed immigration bill deals with the ONLY issue I can remember concerning which 90% of the posts at DU (which strongly oppose this bill) could be replaced by 100% of the post at Freeperland (which hate this bill with a burning passion) and you would not be able to tell the difference. (Well, you would have to eliminate the ethnic slurs and the occasional death threat aimed at politicians from the Freeper posts to make them acceptable at DU.)

There are a few posts at DU that oppose this bill because it is too onerous towards illegal immigrants, while there are no such opinions expressed at FR, but these posts are quite few even at DU.

"What’s wrong with going home and fixing the hellholes they came from? If anyone thinks this will keep more from coming, they’re nuts. Positive reinforcement and 20 per cent Hispanic population ...you don’t have to be Kreskin to see what’s about to happen. Good bye America. Hello Mini-Mexico. That Mexican govt. minister laid it all out a year ago when he told a California paper that Mexico was ‘integrating’ with the US and there wasn’t a thing we could do to stop it."

"This bill is wrong in so many ways. Mostly, it’s a slap in the face to every American. All of us are products of a legal process that led to legal citizenship of a great nation. It’s also an insult to all of those that are in the midst of eagerly awaiting citizenship. Some have waited years and are learning English in the process. Very sad."

"Someone correct me: To get a Z-card, an illegal has to admit to the fact and pay a $5000 fine. If an employer can’t verify the identity of an immigrant worker, they’re charged $75,000 a head for each one. Spokesfolk for the illegals are already boo-hooing that they can’t afford $5000 a head. Whaddayawannabet that employers, especially big ones, will simply pay $5000 a head and help their illegals get their Z-cards rather than risk $75,000 infractions for each? I dunno. It looks like business as usual to me."

"Bush and his liberal cohorts in the Senate are pushing this amnesty trash. If it wasn't for the liberal, backstabbing Republican Senators this trash would have no chance getting through the Senate. Your party over principle philosophy gave us these Republican traitors who just might be able to, with the help of Kennedy and Pelosi and their other Democrat allies, destroy this Country."

This are all freeper posts, but with the deletion of a word or two, could easily be posted at DU and fit right in. (I have to take a shower now to get the freeper stench off.)

[mrcheerful]

1. Hell I seen one freeper that said the answer to this bill was simplely to fine

every business $1,000 per illegal they have working for them. Leave it to a freeper to sound like Dr. Evil in the first movie when Dr. Evil thought $1 million dollars was alot of money.

[Robson]

5. LOL - 1K is chump change

LOL...$1K would be chump change compared to what their psuedo slave labor adds to their profit line at the expense of every working American. How about they fine each business $100K per illegal employee, and $200K per if that business was not withholding and paying taxes for that employee? And that fine is not a one time fine but repeated each time they are caught breaking the law.

[MrSlayer]

2. Broken clocks and whatnot.

I'm pretty much a Buchanan conservative on illegal immigration.

[dave_p]

3. Interesting

Thanks for that, I was wondering, but I can't bear to read their slime.

It's a depressing convergence, especially for a nation founded on immigration. It's fortunate that the interests of bosses will stop the GOP from making it their big wedge issue.

At least it reminds some of us why we have politicians. I knew they'd come in useful some day.

[EST]

4. One of the things I resent about the arguments presented by the

pro-corporate supporters of immigration policy that seeks even more immigration is the idiot-inspired quote, "We're all a nation of immigrants." We are NOT a nation of immigrants in the light they speak of.

I am not. The people on one branch of my forebears are only immigrants if you consider fifteen or twenty thousand years years ago as "recent." The parts of my family that are of "recent" emigre status have still been here so long that their tracks have mostly faded into the murk.

Furthermore, when one's ancestors were citizens more than one hundred years ago, there is little strength in the argument for most people, unless they are arrogant knotheads who worship their particular blood line or have a long standing complaint with the prevailing thinking, often illustrated by having a more colorful skin than do I.

The very ludicrousness of many of the arguments throws me off even before they get to the really silly parts of the sale.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. But we are a nation of immigrants

This country was built by diverse cultures from all over the world.

[EFerrari]

45. (Not to mention, calling ourselves a nation of immigrants

lets us off the hook bigtime.)

/ack

[dave_p]

32. But you're not the USA

Post-1790 immigration contributed most of today's US population as well as sustaining the country's spectacular economic growth over two centuries. The ancestry of today's Americans was mostly foreign at the time of Independence and the Constitution, and that's been so for some decades. So in a very real sense the US is a nation of immigration. It's also a nation of prosperity, and immigration didn't detract from that beyond the hardships suffered by many in their early years following arrival.

[amandabeech]

35. Do you have some cites?

Also, do you have any idea where we will actually house another hundred million people without cutting down more forests, paving over more farmland and draining more wetlands? We import so much food now that we probably would not be able to feed ourselves if our imports were to be cut off unless we all turned vegetarian and even then it might not be possible. How about providing water to residents of the southwest?

I think that we are to the point where we have to consider carrying capacity in light of the coming global warming. Global warming will most likely reduce our food output as well as the amount of fresh water available for human use and industrial processing.

About 3/4 of my ancestors were not in North America in 1790, but that doesn't make me feel like we must continue to take in people now at the same rate that we did in 1900 when the population was only about 75,000,000. At 300,000,000 I think that we can put up the "Limited Vacancies" sign.

[dave_p]

40. Cite, etc.

The cite that everyone refers to is Census Bureau population estimates chief Campbell Gibson's "The contribution of immigration to United States population growth, 1790-1970" in International Migration Review vol.9 no.2 (summer 1975), pp.157-177:

Of the 1970 population of the United States of 203 million, about 105 million is attributable to the 1790 population. About 98 million, or 48 percent, of the 1970 population is attributable to the estimated net immigration of 35.5 million in the 1790-1970 period.

Given the 27.5 million net increase in the foreign-born since 1970, and apportioning the 71m net natural increase between the two 1970 stocks according to their share of the total gives a "non-immigrant" share (the proportion attributable to the 1790 population) of around 142 million, against 159-160m for the post-1790 immigrant stock, suggesting that the share attributable to the 1790 stock fell below half around 1987. Even excluding the 12 million without legal resident status, post-1790 immigrants have contributed more than the Founding Fathers & their countrymen to the peopling of today's America.

Your concerns are understandable, but are pessimistic. The US is a net food exporter. It's more than capable of supporting more people, and frankly if it gave up the burger feast I doubt it would face problems for another century. While its population's quadrupled since 1900 it's still less than half Europe's 700 million (there's no likelihood of the US ever approaching that). And we're not talking 100 million, we're talking 12m who're already there and some of whom will eventually become legally resident anyway under existing law. Water's becoming a problem globally, but the US is better placed than most countries to invest in future supply: clearly further damage to arid areas is undesirable, but immigration's already spreading beyond the core areas of the 1990s. Such changes in the settlement pattern will continue, as is happening in Europe.

It's not the end of the world. Even without immigration, the US population will increase. But population growth in the countries of emigration is slowing. Things change, and the circumstances that created the influx will change too, as has happened with past surges.

[dave_p]

41. More cites

I don't know if you meant immigration & the economy too: compare gross annual legal immigration and GDP. Net immigration's not available by year for the whole period, but follows the same pattern, rising with economic growth and slumping in recession (1890s, 1930s). And if half of today's population is down to post-1790 immigration, so is around half of its GDP - $6-7 trillion. Without two centuries of immigration, the US would already have been supplanted by China as the world's biggest economy.

[amandabeech]

46. As to the 1975 study, I say, so what?

We have taken many people in the past, including 3/4 of my ancestors. I simply see no reason for more.

You call me pessimistic. You're not alone. But I've been right a lot more than I've been wrong. I've accumulated a lot of apologies over the course of my nearly 52 years and I'll be expecting yours in 25 or so.

[dave_p]

48. You asked

I can't see why if you're response is "So what"?

Thanks for wasting my time.

[Gman]

6. I was in Rio Grande City, TX this week

(Rio Grande City) and I would love to take all DU'ers with me to the Rio Grande Valley to see first hand an area of the U.S. where Spanish is spoken more commonly than English and how dirt poor people in the U.S. can be. Any true liberal and most moderates could not help but be moved to appreciate that these people just want to survive and do better for theirselves and their families.

There are a couple of onerous provisions (as I understand the bill) such as the $5000 and the requirement to return to register. What about their job? Where do they get the $5K from?

The reality of it is that the Rio Grande river is just a river running across the land. People have been coming across the Rio Grande (and before that the Nueces) rivers since before the Mexican-American War and will continue to do so as long as economic conditions are much better on this side than the other. If DC really wants to fix immigration from Mexico (and this is solely about Mexico) take that $700 million for the fence and invest it in the economy of the Mexico. Make jobs pay more in Mexico than here and there is no more problem.

[Lasher]

7. The Rio Grande is an international border

I have personally seen poverty in Mexico and in South Korea. Mexico accounted for 58% of the total unauthorized resident population in 1990 and nearly 69% in January 2000.

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/Ill_Report_1211.pdf

The US has taken in quite a few of Mexico's poor, willingly and otherwise. Why not close our border with Mexico now and give the South Koreans a chance? There's lots of them who would jump at the chance to migrate to America. They want better lives too.

There's not room for everybody.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. We are a nation of immigrants

I wouldn't be here if my ancestors were told there was no room for them. Of course there is room for everyone.

[Lasher]

27. Ya think so?

How about we invite everybody in China to live here? And everybody from India? What a foolish notion.

Part of my ancestors came here without permission. That was about 10,000 years ago. In more rescent times, say the last 100 years, others in my bloodline were expected to get permission to enter the US. Wake up, this is not the ice ages or the wild west any more. The world has changed since those days.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. Yes I do think so

I happen to like diversity. :)

[Lasher]

31. When all the people from China come over can they stay at your house?

If all the people in China enjoyed the same standard of living that is enjoyed by the average American it would consume all the natural resources of three planet earths. You want illegal aliens to be welcomed in and you are tailoring your beliefs to fit that desire. There is not room for everyone. You are 100% wrong. :-)

And this is not about diversity. Almost all the illegal aliens who enter the US are coming from Mexico. If you were truly concerned about fairness to all racial and ethnic groups (i.e. diversity) you would be in favor of controlling our borders so that others could be given a fair chance to live in the US. :-)

Nice try playing the racist card. :-)

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. LOL when did I play the racist card?

Looking back, I see that word brought up by YOU. How's that fear working for you?

All the people in China are not going to come here anymore than all my Irish ancestors came here or all the Mexicans are coming here.

Central Americans are not given a fair chance to immigrate here. Neither are the Chinese. Study up on our current laws. They differ significantly from even 20 years ago. If you are European, no problem, come on in and bring your entire family. But if you are Mexican or Chinese, you are banned from immigrating to the US. Quotas been met!

Now if you were poor and your family was hungry and you could walk across a river and get a job making more money in an hour than you could make in a day or maybe even a week in your home country, would you walk across that river regardless of any law forbidding it? I know I would.

You need to get over being afraid and try to understand WHY we have this immigration "problem".

[Lasher]

42. Oh sorry. I thought you said there was room for everyone.

Now everyone's not coming. I guess I missed something. I must have been distracted by being so afraid and ignorant. I wish everyone could be brave and smart like you.

Now let's see: People from Mexico and China are banned because quotas have been met. How can they be filling up their quotas if they're banned? Are Europeans disguising themselves as Cesar Millan and Charlie Chan when they come here so they can fill up Latin American and Asian quotas?

More than half of US foreign-born residents are from Latin America — with 30 percent from Mexico alone. Twenty six percent were born in Asia, 14 percent in Europe, and 8 percent from Africa and other regions.

http://www.prb.org/Articles/2003/NumberofForeignBornReachesAllTimeHighinUS.aspx

But you imply that Europeans have an unfair advantage to immigrate to the US. Maybe it's you who needs to study up.

[watercolors]

8. Same thing in Miami, after Cuban influx

English is rarely spoken anywhere! I for one do not want this bill passed. Enforce the laws that are there now, and add more security to boarders. Illegals have no rights and should be deported, sorry I feel very strongly about this. I hate what is happening to our communities by the influx, we cannot afford them!

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. Borders or boarders?

You don't have to let them live in your house you know.

[amandabeech]

36. Where do you propose that we put them?

Do we cut down more forests? Do we fill in more wetlands? Do we pave over more rain-watered farmland? Where do you suppose the water for all these new people will come from in the southwest? Global warming will make all these problems worse assuming that we are not able to get those CO2 concentrations down to where they should be in time.

Have you seen the destruction of our country's environment and farms from urban sprawl? I remember D.C. in 1976. I live here now and believe me, the damage is incredible. I used to live in south central Pennsylvania, which has some of the best farmland in the country. Now it's being paved over to make room for used car places and more tract housing. The Amish are moving away to poorer and poorer farmlands--I know 'cause they have moved into my uncle's area of Michigan which has poor clay soils. Now they're moving to Montana to become sheep herders. Where do they go from there?

We have 300,000,000 people here now. In 1900, at the height of the last great wave of immigration, we had 75,000,000. I want much lower legal immigration and no illegal immigration and I don't care if my distant cousins have to stay in my ancestral nations. I'd like to help people in poor nations, but I'd much rather help them improve their lot there than come here at this point in U.S. history.

[krispos42]

34. Immigrants have rights

The Constitution applies to all persons under it's juristiction, not just citizens.

And the illegal act of entering the country improperly is a misdemeanor, not a felony. This is so we don't have to put them in jail for a few years before we deport them.

I don't like this bill because it sounds unworkable and I don't like guest worker programs, not because I hate illegal immigrants.

I do think that we need a more diverse pool of immigrants. Quite frankly, there are a lot of people across the globe that are a lot worse off than Cubans and Mexicans. If we're going to allow 400,000 people into our country annually I'd much rather they came from places like, say Somolia, Darfur, the former Yugoslavia, Kurdistan, Palestine, Mongolia, Liberia, Ivory Coast, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, and other places where people are repressed, desperate, slaughtered for sport, famine-stricken, or whatever.

Taking 40,000 people a year from ten different countries will help the most desperate while at the same time integrating them faster into our country.

[Bluerthanblue]

47. wow-

I like the way you express this.

and i agree with you.

peace,
blu

[krispos42]

49. Why thank you! :-) n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. Bingo!

Great post!

[Roland99]

9. Look at some of the comments in this WaPo article on McCain's tirade against Cornyn >>>>

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/05/mccain_cornyn_cursing_showdown.html

McCain is a traitor. That piece of garbage needs to be sent to the gallows!

Posted by: Juan | May 18, 2007 08:06 PM




Time to lock and load, boys. The balkanization of America is here. Let the first bullets find McCain and kennedy. God save us from this "New World order."

Posted by: mike | May 19, 2007 02:04 AM




i'm sorry but anyone who can support this piece of nonsense dreamt up behind closed doors should be shipped to mexico, or wherever they originated from along with the illegals. i just want one person in government with gonads, ready and willing to do the right thing. why do we as americans need third world morals, education, and customs forced upon us. oh,yeah, i refuse to learn spanish.

Posted by: [e-mail] | May 19, 2007 08:40 AM

[Lasher]

10. 56% Support Enforcement Only Immigration Approach

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Fifty-six percent (56%) of American adults favor an enforcement-only approach to immigration reform. Only 29% are opposed.

However, support falls sharply when “a path to citizenship” for illegal aliens already in the United States is added to the mix. Just 42% support the more “comprehensive” approach while 44% are opposed. This proposal was similar to a “grand bargain” announced by Senator Arlen Specter earlier in the week.

<snip>

The enforcement-only approach was defined as a proposal to “build a fence along the Mexican border, assign more border patrol agents, and impose strict penalties on anyone who hires illegal aliens. The proposal would do nothing to legalize the status of illegal aliens already in the country.”

After hearing that, survey respondents were asked a follow-up question: “A different proposal has been made that also includes a fence along the Mexican border, more border patrol agents, strict penalties on anyone who hires illegal aliens. This proposal, however, would also offer illegal aliens a path to citizenship if they pay back taxes and other fines. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/56_support_enforcement_only_immigration_approach

[pampango]

15. That largely sounds like the GOP position (without the guest

worker provision that they like.) It might be that there is another potential compromise between the parties that would involve the GOP dumping the guest worker provision and the Democrats giving in on "amnesty" and going with just an "enforcement only approach". You would have to get such a compromise past the "guest worker" Repubs and the "amnesty" Democrats, but it would seem as doable as the current compromise which gives one side the guest workers and the other the amnesty.

[Lasher]

30. Even more so if the poll can be believed.

The poll clearly indicates that most Americans want enforcement only legislation, without any concessions for cheap labor corporatists or illegal alien sympathizer. And more appropriate too if you have any belief at all in the concept of majority rule.

This controversy transcends party lines.

[Rydz777]

11. NAFTA wrecked the Mexican economy - which was already

a shaky affair based on massive poverty and a corrupt oligarchy. Quite sensibly, and facing starvation, the campesinos headed "al Norte" to look for menial jobs - and they found that cheap labor was welcome, especially when it was off the books.

I'm coming slowly to the view that all this is no accident, but part of a considered intention to create a North American Entity, an economic and eventually political unit ruled from Washington, that has no internal borders and sucks in both cheap labor from Mexico (and Central America, remember CAFTA) and the natural resources of Canada. In any case, intentional or not, we are heading that way - but it is not going to be a smooth ride.

[pampango]

12. Opposition to a "North American Union" is something that I saw

a lot of in Freeperland, as well, but I chose to post some of the specifically immigration-related post. Of course, the opposition over there usually includes the sentiment that they don't want to share a country with those (ethnic slur deleted.) ;)

[amandabeech]

37. Free trade with China was a major factor, too.

Why pay Mexicans $1.00 and hour when you can get Chinese for $0.10 an hour? Shipping charges are still low even though the price of petroleum is much, much higher than it was in the '90s.

Mexico is also suffering from a sharp increase in population. As late as the '70s, Mexican women were having 6-7 children and most survived to adulthood. That's a lot, and I mean a lot, of new jobs for any nation to produce. We sure couldn't do it, and the Mexicans can't do it, either. I'm sure that the Oligarchs that rule Mexico wouldn't even bother to try.

[AlCzervik]

13. the only good thing about this bill is that it probably won't pass.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. Pat Buchanan said this bill would divide the republican party

So I am supporting it. :evilgrin:

[AlCzervik]

22. from what i heard last night Emmanuel and Pelosi told Bush that they won't bring it to

the floor unless there are at least 60-70 republicans that will support it--i don't see that happening. I think there are going to be so many amendments added to it even if it gets to the floor that it will never pass.

[amandabeech]

39. It might cause problems amont rank-and-file Democrats as well.

The immigration issue cuts across party lines.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. I'm supporting it only because it's a step in the right direction.

Putting 12 million immigrants on the road to citizenship is the right thing to do. The punitive parts of it against the immigrants is, indeed, onerous but it's probably the best the people can get from a society still living in fear of the "other".

[Craftsman]

53. It is about wages

My family has a history of working in the building trades. I know for a fact that illegals have driven down wages greatly. It is a blue collar bread and butter issue.

[Mountainman]

21. It is obvious to me that xenophobia is at work here. 12million illegals and 300 million

citizens. From my perspective I cannot understand the fear. The same things being said now were said about the Chinese and Irish and Eastern Europeans.

The corporations have created a them verses us mentality. If the illegals were made legal we could have a super working class that could make a country here that is just for all of us and begin building an economy in Mexico that would create better working conditions there. Yet we play like a bunch of Neanderthal knuckle draggers and demand that the clock be turned back to some previous time period that only exists in our minds.

I just can't believe the ignorance on all levels with this issue.

[wildhorses]

24. i agree. give them a ss# and get them in our tax base NOW

:applause:

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. Yes it is very sad, isn't it?

Great post!

[donco6]

29. It should be worrisome to all if we agree with freeperland.

Red flag, anyone?

[amandabeech]

38. Make that 288 million citizens and 12 million undocumenteds.

Supply and demand may have made some former decent working class wages into poverty wages. The construction trades are a good example.

And low construction wages mean cheaper and more McMansions. I don't know about you, but I despise the things and the sprawl that they bring. Let's just turn more farmland into hydrocarbon burners!

[Lasher]

43. I would like to make a point if I may.

If you're not too busy labeling those who disagree with you, please consider that the Chinese and Irish and Eastern Europeans came here legally. The controversy is not really about legal immigration.

Now I'll get back to dragging my big hairy knuckles across the cave.

[Zookeeper]

50. We could have "Super Working Class!" Replace all those...

pesky black people. (:sarcasm: )

http://www.spokesman-recorder.com/News/Article/Article.asp?NewsID=7786&sID=3

Are Illegal Immigrants Taking Jobs from Blacks?

For Blacks and Latinos, destinies in securing a place in America have been, in many ways, intertwined. But that view may unravel, as current trends show a wave of illegal immigration has helped push Blacks down the hole, instead of out of it.

In spite of published reports indicating increases in jobs and decreases in unemployment levels, Blacks are still struggling. With the nationwide unemployment rate dropping from February’s rating of 4.8 percent, the number for Black unemployment, skilled or unskilled, remained at a cumulative 9.3 percent.

The Center for Immigration Studies, through a Census Bureau derived report concluded any negative effect from immigration will fall on the 26 million native-born workers in the U.S. who already have the lowest wages and highest unemployment

Additional data states 40 percent of native-born Blacks work in high-immigrant occupations – cleaning, food preparation, manufacturing and transportation

Arguably the most racist policy in this country for the past quarter century has been that of immigration,” Anderson said. “An onslaught of poorly educated, mostly Hispanic immigrants has severely hindered attempts of African-Americans to climb up the economic ladder.

A new study from the Pew Hispanic Center reports salaries among Latinos have fallen for the last two years – in large part due to more than 850,000 new illegal immigrants entering the country each year.

======

You can't believe the "ignorance?" I can't believe the tunnel vision.

[pampango]

52. I agree that there is a lot of xenophobia at work.

I am not so sure that the corporations are to blame, though. If anything they seem to be some of the prime beneficiaries of the influx of cheap labor.

Also, I am not aware of any "corporation-free" countries, socialist or communist, either now or historically, that welcomed large numbers of immigrants to their countries.

While I support the legalization of the illegal immigrants now here, since I think they are on balance good for the country, I acknowledge that every country has a right to control it borders and immigration into it. (I would understand Cuba's reluctance to permit unlimited immigration from the US under a hypothetical Bush-inspired scheme to take over the country through immigration - a pretty lame scenario, I admit, but I did ascribe it to Bush. ;) )

[bunkerbuster1]

23. A lot of selective outrage on this issue.

I probably don't need to outline where the selectivity lies.

I'll say this much; it's the only issue where I find the Bush Administration, albeit for the wrong reasons, sounds somewhat reasonable. Naturally the reason they favor more humane treatment of illegals is to provide cheap labor and labor competition for American workers (part of their larger program of keeping most citizens down). But it happens to be the right thing to do, in essence.

Where they, and most all free-marketeers screw up is in the other side of the equation, where we lobby, advocate, twist arms and threaten all manner of nasty shit if other nations fail to reciprocate with vastly improved labor and environmental laws of their own.

If this whole debate winds up having the effect of ensuring a cleaner environment and better working conditions worldwide, then who, theoretically, cares where the workers live? Let me move to Mexico or Ireland or wherever if I want to and work there. People and capital should be able to move wherever it's needed, and can be applied efficiently. So long as we're all living under essentially the same minimum standards, I'm cool with that.

[w4rma]

25. Good! Maybe we can stop that idiotic bill.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x917221

[EFerrari]

44. I hope your water pressure is good.

:(

[KharmaTrain]

51. What "Threat"

Maybe I'm missing the report where Mexicans military forces entered Tucson or La Cucucracha "terrirists" have flown planes into buildings. THAT is a threat...an actual invasion.

The threat here is to the working class by corporations that see labor as an exploitable, expendable comodity and profits surpass human dignity and even a living wage. The threat is by the person who hires the undocumented worker...exploits their labor for less than minimum or living wage that drives down wages for ALL and encourages more union busting and the further erosion of benefits from the few who still get them. It also dumps social problems in many areas where the undocumented are looked on as "leeches" primarily since they don't look right or speak "funny". To hell that earlier that day, the guy who screams about how awful them Mexican scum is enjoyed a cheap quickie burger cooked by and then served by the same people he trashes. Now how about boycotting that restaurant? Or how about the government enforcing laws and put some serious teeth into those doing the hiring. Also, let's put on a tax on goods from countries where our jobs have been outsourced...making up the difference between the minimum wage in that country as opposed to the one here. Wanna see outsourcing and the "immigration" problem vanish? That's one hell of a good start.

While some may be suffering from losing a job to an "illegal", but who did the firing? It sure wasn't the "illegal".