Am I somehow responsible? Otherwise what is this use of "you," have I even advocated for this?
Voter ID pattern is emerging.
- Thread starter rld
- Start date
What nonsense! Please name for us a single state (international) that enfrancises non-nationals who are illegally in that state.
Fuji seems to have this bizarre idea that citizens and non-citizens should have all the same rights. I think it is his subtle way of calling for one world government and the abolition of nation states. I hope.
I modified your post to show you the moral company you're keeping. W are but talking about the actions of a handful of people. We are talking about four percent of the US population.
The illegal workforce is a structural element of the US economy, just as slavery once was. The exclusion of these people us just as immoral.
Either restructure the economy to eliminate the 12 million strong illegal workforce, or enfranchise them.
As it stands there is a significant, integral segment of the UD population that is excluded from the political process and that is simply undemocratic and inhumane.
i suspect that these folks you are referring to are citizens of other countries. They are not disenfranchised because if their home country is a democracy, they can vote there.
If they want to vote in the US, then they should become citizens.
You are more than aware than illegal immigrants are not slaves in any meaningful sense. It is just you being childish and pedantic again.
Bullshit. The US economy requires illegal labor to function. They are not present by their own choice alone but also because the US economy requires them. It's a structural feature of US society, not a handful of people breaking the rules.
If these particular individuals acquired citizenship (how) they would be replaced by others, as there is demand for them.
The US economy cannot function without the presence of people who can be paid less to work in unsafe conditions and without the protection of employment law or human rights.
It is very similar to slavery, like, one step up from that.
So the Canadian economy and system requires lawyers and that means that I am not a lawyer by choice. Your arguments are really off on this one. That proposition is absurd.
Slavery implies the ownership of people, people as objects. What you are talking about is an underground economy and perhaps bad working conditions. There really is almost no qualitative overlap between the two positions.
It is also a structural feature of their home countries where they cannot be as successful as they wish to be. They can vote there, if the franchise is so important.
Countries all over the world rely on foreign workers who do not get the vote. Why do you single out the United States?
In Canada if you are here on a work visa you are building up Canadian experience which you can eventually translate into an application for permanent residence followed by citizenship. There is a clear path to follow for those who wish to do that. Moreover, even for those who don't, as legal workers here on a visa all the ordinary protections of our laws are in effect. While there are clearly some abuses and some problems I believe it's the clear goal of our government to create a process that is fair and humane.
In the US these workers are illegal, and so denied all the support and protection of the state that everyone else enjoys. They really are second class.
With this group now representing one person in twenty five it's ridiculous to claim it's just a few isolated people who broke the law. The US economy is building up a large class of laborers who exist outside the protection of labor law, paid less than legal minimums, denied access to police or health services, forced to work in unsafe conditions, and without recourse from abuse.
To argue that they are not part of the United States is ludicrous, they are as integral to the US economy as slaves once were.
Either put then on a clear path to citizenship, with access to the law and other services, or else implement reforms to eliminate them.
Continuing to build up an increasing labor force that is treated as if sub human, with tacit support by the government, really is not that far from slavery in the continuum of immoral behavior.
In the US these workers are illegal, and so denied all the support and protection of the state that everyone else enjoys. They really are second class.
With this group now representing one person in twenty five it's ridiculous to claim it's just a few isolated people who broke the law. The US economy is building up a large class of laborers who exist outside the protection of labor law, paid less than legal minimums, denied access to police or health services, forced to work in unsafe conditions, and without recourse from abuse.
To argue that they are not part of the United States is ludicrous, they are as integral to the US economy as slaves once were.
Either put then on a clear path to citizenship, with access to the law and other services, or else implement reforms to eliminate them.
Continuing to build up an increasing labor force that is treated as if sub human, with tacit support by the government, really is not that far from slavery in the continuum of immoral behavior.
So your comparison is between people in Canada here on a work Visa and illegal immigrants? What a crock.
Do you really expect to have a rational discussion when you use such idiotic analogies?
Your argument can of course be rephrased that if illegal labor did not come to the U.S., agriculture would be forced to mechanize in the same manner it has in other parts of the world.
Hence it is the fault of illegal workers that U.S. Agriculture has not properly mechanized.
Gosh I thought there had to be a bottom rung on every ladder by definition. If it's a wage ladder the bottom rung will always be occupied by the workers who are the most disadvantaged and can bring the least power to the bargaining table with their employers.
That would certainly apply to workers who are chattel, and absent them workers in danger of deportation, and unable to safely access ordinary resources in the community—like illegals—would certainly seem to b bottom rung folks. Unless they exist only in such numbers as to be negligible (meaning the effective bottom rung goes to people with more advantages than those couple of illegals, like non-union manual laborers, say) then those illegals are a structural and integral part of the economy. Just like everyone else.
As a nation, America spilled lakes of blood to end slavery and more to end the heritage of injustice the bigots perpetrate to this day. But you haven't yet declared that bottom rung is going to be anything but brutal, harsh, unsafe and exploitive. In fact the political momentum is to decrease what few universal safeguards there are.
That bottom rung is structural; tell us how comfy it is, what good, safe working conditions are enforced there. Then we'll know the analogy is as false as you wish it to be.
Are you really attempting to argue that a seasonal fruit picker is going to be able to eventually (based solely on fruit picking) apply for Permanent Residence in Canada?
So what you seemingly are arguing is that these workers don't have a choice that they are somehow being forced to illegally come to the U.S. Further that because the law has not been aggressively enforced (guess why that might be besides the economic arguments you have made) that therefore the law should never be enforced.
OldJones, but then if I say the law should be strictly enforced I can even now hear the arguments about how unfeeling that is.
I will not put words into your mouth but there seem to be two arguments going on: There is a deliberate plot to have illegals in the U.S. and it is horrific to deport said illegals.
I will not put words into your mouth but there seem to be two arguments going on: There is a deliberate plot to have illegals in the U.S. and it is horrific to deport said illegals.
One can argue about the profound immigration changes that the Government lead by Pierre Trudeau enacted, but at least that was via government policy and Canadians for good or ill put that government in power.
On the other hand in the U.S. we are talking about widespread violation of Immigration Law. No President campaigned saying elect me and I will fail to enforce the immigration laws and change the entire composition of the U.S. not through policies debated in the public forum and passed into legislation by the Congress, but rather by violation of the law.
On the other hand in the U.S. we are talking about widespread violation of Immigration Law. No President campaigned saying elect me and I will fail to enforce the immigration laws and change the entire composition of the U.S. not through policies debated in the public forum and passed into legislation by the Congress, but rather by violation of the law.
They did however campaign on the usual conservative lie that everything was already fine and could only get better if they cut taxes.
How was that going to buy better immigration control and border enforcement?
The US illegal immigrant population is large enough to be intentional policy by the various US governments. Certainly tolerated. I believe it is seen as a necessary evil and so nothing is done.
The sanctions all apply to the workers, rather than the employers, which had the effect of making the workers more vulnerable and therefore more exploitable, nearer to slavery.
It is US policy to have a large and vulnerable second class that can be exploited.
If it were not policy, this class would never have grown to 4% of the US population.
Sure. And it is the fault of US policy makers that the economy is based on illegal workers. It's relatively easy to stop the practice, just criminalize those who employ illegal workers while offering a cash reward and general amnesty to any illegal worker who turns in his employer.
The illegal work force would be gone the next day.
Instead you implement penalties only on the workers, which facilitates their exploitation by employers by limiting their recourse.
