How would you solve it?

[Buffy]

How would you solve the problem of illegal immigration? would you let them continue to pour across our borders, 3000 or 4000 per night, bringing not just illegals, but criminals, drug smugglers, disguised middle easterners, or would you stop it? HOW?

Buy importing everything we consume, and outsourcing everything we can to overseas locations: this will mean there are no jobs here for them to take. It will be most important to eliminate all farming that cannot be fully automated, and turning all janitorial services over to robots or maybe require mandatory civil service for teenagers cleaning toilets (with an exception only for those who volunteer for the armed forces). Make all recreational drugs government subsidized so that there is no financial incentive to smuggle them (who thought that up? George Schultz!!!). To solve the crime problem, we should license criminals, if you grew up in South Central Los Angeles, you only have to go to prison. If you're from the middle east and unlicensed, you'll be forced to serve your sentence on a pig farm owned by single women.

 

No seriously, until there is more development of viable businesses in these countries (Mexico, Central and South American countries all pretend their second-world, but they're really third world), there will be people streaming to where the jobs are. And the way that we are transforming America into a country that ships all its prowess in high-tech and manufacturing overseas and emphasizes low-level service jobs, and encourages reckless borrowing against inflated housing prices to finance a "recovery", we're going to see massive influxes of "illegal" (but highly desired!) aliens (serfs!). Of course once the bubble bursts and the economy tanks, we'll really be mad at those aliens for taking jobs we should have at Wal*Mart or McDonalds...

 

"It's cold!"

Buffy

[questor]

Now Buffy, i didn't ask one to define or describe the problem. i asked ..How do you solve the problem as it exists today..right now!

[Buffy]

Now Buffy, i didn't ask one to define or describe the problem. i asked ..How do you solve the problem as it exists today..right now!

I did answer, but not too completely. Firstly, there's not "right now" solution. They're here. There's no way to make them go away, even if you conduct house to house searches in East LA, or Modesto, East Bergen or Cleveland, and march them back across the border. The issues are entirely economic, and until there is more equivalence of pay for work around the world, there will be massive flows of labor. And making those changes will take a significant amount of time. The quickest way to "fix" the problem unfortunately *is* to have our economy tank, but really no one wants that (even though nobody's really putting the brakes on that need to be applied). The real solution is continued commitment to free trade and investment in local economies: I'm a strong believer in the notion that if we have to spend our money wisely, our best bet is to pour massive investment dollars (not government handouts, but tax breaks to businesses) to develop Mexico's economy. If Mexico were much stronger, the influx from Central and South America would stop there (and their economies would slowly improve over time!).

 

There are no "easy" or "fast" solutions to anything that is a structural problem.

 

Aclamaciones,

Buffy

[questor]

So Buffy, we can only solve this problem by making Mexico financially stronger, something that the Mexicans have been unable to do for themselves. how many billions and how much time will this take? El Presidente Fox does not see this illegal flood as a problem and has made no moves to stanch the flow. i guess the constant flow of US dollars helps bolster his economy and removes pressure from him to make changes to help his own people. do we let it continue at 3000-4000 people per day, or do we try to stop it?

[damocles]

I would certainly think so - it takes an enormous amount of resources to build cars, and if you can only drive one at a time, why have three?

 

I work in an office/factory forty miles from my home. My wife works at a school even further away, and I have a daughter that works and attends school almost a hundred miles from home but home bases on the weekends and during breaks. Thnat is why I have three.

 

My solution to the problem; if having three cars is a ecological nonstarter? Re-instate a decent commercial railroad based mass transit system and re-destribute the human population to minimize the range encroachment on the ecology. I don't want to go to a high density human/volume environment as we have now. That promotes increased stress when you crowd what is essentially a grasslands scavenger animal into a hive colony(city). Spread us out and decentralize the power generation/human work and heat pollution associated with it. Find cooler ways to manufacture and transport per kilogram of mass worked over time.

 

On a simpler side note I want a viable hydrogen fuel cell technology(I like my car!) so that I put water vapor into the air instead of flouro hydrocarbons and sulpher dioxide!

[Buffy]

So Buffy, we can only solve this problem by making Mexico financially stronger, something that the Mexicans have been unable to do for themselves. how many billions and how much time will this take?

It will take a long time. The biggest problem is the corruption in government, but that's actually improving. The money is there to, as Mexico has become a strong oil exporter.

El Presidente Fox does not see this illegal flood as a problem and has made no moves to stanch the flow. i guess the constant flow of US dollars helps bolster his economy and removes pressure from him to make changes to help his own people.

That's right and I don't blame him. The Mexican public really does think that we're being a bunch of hypocrites because the only reason that all those people come across the border is that *we continue to pay them when they get here*. Even Louis Farrakan agreed with Fox who got blasted last week for "racist" remarks: (from AP) Farrakhan said, blacks do not want to go to farms and pick fruit because they already "picked enough cotton...Why are you so foolishly sensitive when somebody is telling you the truth?" How are you going to stop it when the same politicians who mouth words of consternation about "illegals" won't touch a line of legislation because the big farm conglomerates who depend on that labor pay big bucks to their campaigns.

 

There's no way to solve this problem unless there is an incentive not to come. Its not just money, its time, and cultural change.

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[questor]

Buffy, if you really wanted to stop immigration from Mexico, it would be quite simple.as in treatment for other diseases, the treatment would be quite draconian, but it would work. if your life depended upon stopping the flow of illegal immigrants, could you think of a way to do it?

[Buffy]

Buffy, if you really wanted to stop immigration from Mexico, it would be quite simple.as in treatment for other diseases, the treatment would be quite draconian, but it would work. if your life depended upon stopping the flow of illegal immigrants, could you think of a way to do it?

Sure, we just line up a bunch of people on the border and shoot anything that moves. Works good! Is it a good idea? I doubt it. Its hard not to define shooting unarmed people as murder. Do you think we'd be better off with the world justifiably convinced that we're a bunch of bloodthirsty, selfish, murderers? Can a good Christian or Jew or Muslim really countenance that sort of behavior? Will the ends really justify the means?

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[questor]

Buffy, you're correct in one regard, shooting them would solve the problem, but create a great outcry from the world. what about putting a poison on the ground that would kill them if they walked or drove through it? signs would be posted warning people about the poison and the Mexican government would be warned and the American and Mexican radio and TV stations would carry warnings. this way only those who wanted to commit suicide would try the journey. in most cases, if you want to stop people from doing something, if you are really serious about stopping them, the last but only true way to do it is to kill them. unfortunate. the only way to solve this problem is to kill people.

[damocles]

Why do we have to say it is a problem, when range migration(illegal immigration and smuggling) is normal for groups of humans, as it is for any other animal? Our awareness makes it a problem to the threatened population within the invaded ecology.

 

If you want to stop human range migration you must apply three concurrent solutions;

a. negative ecological incentives(make the chosen invaded ecdology economically unattractive to the migrators aqs opposed to remaining where they now live.)

b. impose a barrier.(fence.)

c. disincentify the migration.(make it costly to view it as a survival option.)

 

I don't see a. and c. as viable.

I know b. is a failed option whenever people try it.(Consider the walls of history from Hadrian to the Chinese wall to the Berlin Wall to the current Israeli wall etc.).

 

I suggest that as a solution to current illegal immigration the general American population become familiar with Cinco de Mayo and learn Spanish.

[questor]

Damocles, as i read it, your solution is to give up what we have made with our labor and accomodate to the invasion. good thing we don't use the same philosophy with cancer.

[Buffy]

what about putting a poison on the ground that would kill them if they walked or drove through it? signs would be posted warning people about the poison and the Mexican government would be warned and the American and Mexican radio and TV stations would carry warnings. this way only those who wanted to commit suicide would try the journey.

"Poisons" are chemical weapons and given that we in America are at war principally to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction--which all lethal chemical weapons like you've described here are defined as by the way--how hypocritical would we look. In addition, poisons sprinkled on the ground do not stay put. Would you sprinkle them along the Rio Grande and have it end up in virtually all water sources on the American side?

in most cases, if you want to stop people from doing something, if you are really serious about stopping them, the last but only true way to do it is to kill them. unfortunate. the only way to solve this problem is to kill people.

I think that's the point I'm trying to make, as long as they still have a strong economic incentive to keep coming. If you remove that incentive, either by improving their own economies or making ours a disadvantageous alternative (really, trashing our own economy to bring it down to third world status) is the only *real* solution.

 

Its notable that hiring illegal aliens is illegal, but is rarely prosecuted and because the business lobby is strong, the laws basically let them off the hook for not doing more than glancing at forged Green Cards (and there's a huge industry in forged documents of course). Yes it would be good to do more to enforce the laws, but I can assure you that the money to be made by their buddies in the businesses that depend on cheap illegal labor is something that the politicians cannot afford if they want to get reelected...

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[questor]

Buffy , it is one thing to describe a problem, it is another thing to present a solution to the problem. solutions are not always easy or pretty. your stated solution is to ruin our own economy so they won't have anything to gain. that also leaves us with nothing to gain. if you use a biodegradable chemical which quickly degrades and deliver it only when illegals are spotted and hurts (like pepper spray ) but doesn't kill, how would that be ?

to avoid the spray all they have to do is not cross the border. maybe then they can help solve their OWN countries problems.

[damocles]

Questor;

 

I have a historical perspective of how humans behaved. I look at humans as just another animal(albeit layered over with language and tool using) subject to the usual environmental conditions. Plus; I have no illusions. If you want to argue birth rates and migration patterns of competing human groups, then I'm agreeable to the discussion. If you wish to argue polemically about territoriality, then I ask you the following questions;

 

a. has America made a move toward implementing a workable solution toward Mexico as the source of illegal immigration?

1. conquest and integration by superimposition of the conquering culture?

2. cultural imposition through economic aggression?

3. amalgamation by peaceful means?

 

b. has Mexico made a move toward implementing a workable solution toward America as the desired new ecological range for their surplus population?

1. invasion through illegal immigration?

2. cultural insulation by the invading population by resisting amalgamation into the culturew of the invaded range?

3. supplementation and imposition of the invading culture onto the native culture of the invaded range?

 

I have answers to those questions that led me to write;

 

I suggest that as a solution to current illegal immigration the general American population become familiar with Cinco de Mayo and learn Spanish.

 

I do not regard illegal immigration as akin to cancer. That is what I call "a false analogy". If you wish to use an analogy then I suggest a migratory one to fit the actual mechanism under discussion such as the invasion of established territorial range by two competing groups of appropiately analogous social plains scavengers to humans (baboon troops for example). You will discover that the coping mechanisms used are surprisingly similar to the human ones and as usually ineffectual.

 

Accomadation, adaptation, and integration of the migrating population's culture into the invaded range's culture are successful coping strategies. We, Americans, used to practice it. It was called the melting pot before we got into this balkanizing multiculturalism kick that tended to splinter us as a community apart from one another.

[questor]

Damocles, i don't quite understand you, on the one hand you imply that we just sit back

and allow the ''invaders '' to take over our country, and on the other you seem critical of

''balkanizing multiculturalism''. since we now have a horde of 4000 or so illegals per day

streaming across the border with little impediment and have 2 state governors declaring a state of emergency, it seems to me that we are already under seige. it would be far easier to stop them at the border than to catch them later to deport them. a cancer is caused by cells which have lost their ability to stop replication and have become invasive and deadly to adjacent tissue and eventually the host. this seems a perfect analogy to me.

[damocles]

Damocles, i don't quite understand you, on the one hand you imply that we just sit back and allow the ''invaders '' to take over our country, and on the other you seem critical of ''balkanizing multiculturalism''. since we now have a horde of 4000 or so illegals per day streaming across the border with little impediment and have 2 state governors declaring a state of emergency, it seems to me that we are already under seige. it would be far easier to stop them at the border than to catch them later to deport them. a cancer is caused by cells which have lost their ability to stop replication and have become invasive and deadly to adjacent tissue and eventually the host. this seems a perfect analogy to me.

Today 09:58 AM

 

By Questor;

 

 

First.

 

Cancer cells are internal to the mj8ulticellular organism of which they are a part. Some external irritant may cause mestasizing cells but the cells are native to the body-not intruders-hence false analogy, whereas an infection like TB or influenza is an invasion of the host by parasitical infectious agents.

 

Second. Historical evidence suggests that unless you intend genocide(which I oppose as a solution for any crisis), mass migratory movements of human beings won't be stopped by law enforcement, barriers, or militarized borders. People find a way. Mexico is poor. America is rich. The best and the toughest humans go where they can get rich. That is a biological imperative. Rich(comparatively) healthy humans usually have healthier kids who survive them and leave more offspring to transmit the characteristic. Cultures that emphasize large families thAat pursue wealth will have more lines of successful decent than cultures that suggest rearing children are less important than self-fulfillment..

 

In short the Mexicans are reproducing faster than Americans. Mexico has a deliberate policy of dumping their aggressive population surplus northward. This is not a bad thing if we in America take these immigrants teach them English and the American way of life as we did with the vast hordes of Irish, Italians, Germans, Poles, Russians, and others who entered our range(country) in the 19th and early twentieth century. The problem with the present immigration scheme is that we refuse to impose a uniform American cultural standard on those who migrate into our range. Whether legal or illegal immigrants we should scoop them all up and teach them three fundamental things in our schools along with the various "R's";

 

a. American dialectal English as the only accepted language of business, government law and social discourse.

b. American political theory and practice.

c. American citizen principles with the emphasis on citizenship duty as the foundation before the granting of "rights":

 

so that these immigrants learn their first loyalty is to "America" and not to what they left behind in the "old" country.

 

To teach them this we will have to learn their language to communicate and make it part of our temporary secondary language sets, much as for a while German was secondary in Pennsylvania or Swedish was secondary in Minnesota, but we must never let a foreeign language achieve equality or formal status acceptable to us as English isw, which we use as the language of law, governance and economics; or else how do we force the immigrants to adopt our ways and integrate into our system? Learning Spanish as a second language for us is not a bad thing since most of our neighbors adjacent to our range speak Spanish as their primary language and we would like to trade with them.

 

Nevertheless;

 

there should be no special dispensation made for the immigrants to accommodate their special cultural languages or prejudices aside from the normal healthy acceptance of positive attributes like popular languager phrases, culture heroes and historical traditions that equate well and reinforce the standard "American" virtues. Thus traditions like celebrating Cinco de Mayo which celebrate the struggle for liberty fits in well with what "we" want. while:

 

http://www.mayorno.com/WhoIsMecha.html

 

does not.

 

Thus we get:

 

http://www.diversityalliance.org/docs/Chang-aztlan.html

 

Notice with interest the name of the author?

 

MULTICULTURALISM, IMMIGRATION AND AZTLAN*

 

By Maria Hsia Chang

 

She is an AMERICAN whose ancestors came from China. There is a high probability they were press ganged to work upon the western railroads as cheap(slave) construction labor. Yet see how she writes?

 

I think you understand me clearly now?

[questor]

I do understand capitulation as a solution.