Interesting article about undocumented aliens

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? This would be federal law

The USSC has made some rulings lately with specific language that is interesting. The following article talks about it.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/05/opinion/garcia-illegal-immigrants/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

[FlyingRon]

I don't see anything particular interesting about the article. Complete idiotic sensationalism. If Mr. Garcia would start with a dictionary rather than stereotypical knee jerk rhetoric he would find that there is a distinction between "ILLEGAL" and "CRIMINAL" in both colloquial English use and the LAW (both specific to the US and historically). Illegal just means contrary to the law. The illegal immigrant or worker is illegal even if the Supreme Court holds them not to have committed crimes. I am guilty of illegal parking if I don't put a quarter in the meter even though it's not criminal.

And yes, those who are not present or working illegally, have a right to feel hostility to those who do.

 

[LdiJ]

I don't see anything particular interesting about the article. Complete idiotic sensationalism. If Mr. Garcia would start with a dictionary rather than stereotypical knee jerk rhetoric he would find that there is a distinction between "ILLEGAL" and "CRIMINAL" in both colloquial English use and the LAW (both specific to the US and historically). Illegal just means contrary to the law. The illegal immigrant or worker is illegal even if the Supreme Court holds them not to have committed crimes. I am guilty of illegal parking if I don't put a quarter in the meter even though it's not criminal.

And yes, those who are not present or working illegally, have a right to feel hostility to those who do.

It wasn't Mr. Garcia's rhetoric that I found interesting. It was the specific quotes from the USSC's rulings.

 

[FlyingRon]

It wasn't Mr. Garcia's rhetoric that I found interesting. It was the specific quotes from the USSC's rulings.

The only quote in the article is "As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States" (and the subsentence fragment on the ties to community).
Frankly, the entire Garcia article is a complete piece of garbage and completely misses the really interesting points of the decision.

The point is the federal preemption of Arizona trying to make it a crime to be "illegal." This is hardly a revolutionary concept. The fact that immigration is a controversial issue makes
what is a pretty obvious case of federal preemption straight forward.

The decision is here by the way if you want to read an version without Garcia's attention whoring.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-182.pdf

 

[LdiJ]

The only quote in the article is "As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States" (and the subsentence fragment on the ties to community).
Frankly, the entire Garcia article is a complete piece of garbage and completely misses the really interesting points of the decision.

The point is the federal preemption of Arizona trying to make it a crime to be "illegal." This is hardly a revolutionary concept. The fact that immigration is a controversial issue makes
what is a pretty obvious case of federal preemption straight forward.

The decision is here by the way if you want to read an version without Garcia's attention whoring.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-182.pdf

Thanks for the link...I will read it.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Another article twisted to favor illegals. They gear all of these to make you feel sorry for them. I am sorry for them. I also want them to go home, where they belong, instead of being here at my expense. Even if they are working, they are taking away a job form another person, who my taxes are supporting. That said, I have no problem with legal immigration, even if I know the laws regarding it are being manipulated. We need to strengthen those laws.

 

[Proserpina]

Another article twisted to favor illegals. They gear all of these to make you feel sorry for them. I am sorry for them. I also want them to go home, where they belong, instead of being here at my expense. Even if they are working, they are taking away a job form another person, who my taxes are supporting. That said, I have no problem with legal immigration, even if I know the laws regarding it are being manipulated. We need to strengthen those laws.

Person A = works low-income, underpaid job (employer pays below min. wage because they can get away with it). Spends those earnings in the community where he lives. Cannot qualify for the vast majority of forms of state aid.

Person B = Floats about on welfare, has no intention of seeking work. Can get away with this for extended periods in many states. Entitled to subsidized housing, food, cash payments.

Which one do you think is the undocumented alien?

I know which one I'd rather have my tax dollars supporting, put it that way.

This is obviously not a black and white issue, and it's easy to fall into the trap of believing the media spin put forward by all "sides" of this.


Edited to add: I didn't even read LdiJ's article. This is purely in response to OhWarrior's post.

 

[Eekamouse]

Person A does NOT spend all his earnings in the community. He sends a portion it home to Mexico to support his family there. Curious why you think he is not applying for any of our state aid...

 

[Proserpina]

Person A does NOT spend all his earnings in the community. He sends a portion it home to Mexico to support his family there. Curious why you think he is not applying for any of our state aid...

Oh, he's free to apply. I said nothing to him not being able to apply. He just - with the exception of a teeny handful of states - won't QUALIFY.

I'm a landed immigrant who did it the hard (and legal and expensive) way; there are few who get more pissy about illegals taking advantage of the system than I. If anything I have a vested interest in making sure that everything is done the right way.

But seriously? The truth is that there aren't as many illegal aliens getting state aid as the media would have you believe. Do you happen to know which demographic actually takes up more welfare dollars?

Let's see how people answer. I'll drop a hint though - it's not illegal Mexicans.

 

[Proserpina]

(ComPLETEly off-topic, and apologies to L - but does the forum "stall" TWICE a day these days?! Once at about 4:10pm pacific, and again just before 11pm? That's bothersome! )

 

[Eekamouse]

Ha! I thought you wrote that you're a "landlord immigrant" and it totally screwed up the content of your post for me. LOL!

 

[Proserpina]

Ha! I thought you wrote that you're a "landlord immigrant" and it totally screwed up the content of your post for me. LOL!

Baaaahahahahaha!

I suppose I'm the Lord (well, Lady - that's not tooooo much of a stretch, right? I expect to hear crickets chirping and nothing else ) of our little bit of land here so yeah, that might actually be technically correct!



Again, apologies to L for the slight - but funny as all get-out - derailment!

 

[LdiJ]

Oh, he's free to apply. I said nothing to him not being able to apply. He just - with the exception of a teeny handful of states - won't QUALIFY.

I'm a landed immigrant who did it the hard (and legal and expensive) way; there are few who get more pissy about illegals taking advantage of the system than I. If anything I have a vested interest in making sure that everything is done the right way.

But seriously? The truth is that there aren't as many illegal aliens getting state aid as the media would have you believe. Do you happen to know which demographic actually takes up more welfare dollars?

Let's see how people answer. I'll drop a hint though - it's not illegal Mexicans.

I actually do tax returns for a couple dozen undocumented aliens every year. They pay into social security and medicare and will never receive any benefit from either of those programs. They pay higher taxes than anyone else because they are not eligible for many of the credits associated with having children. They own homes and pay property taxes. Yes, a couple of them receive medicaid for their US citizen children, but most of them earn too much money to qualify for any kind of welfare. When both parents are working full time, even at not much more than minimum wage, they generally earn to much to qualify for welfare benefits, and that is what most of them do.

Yes, I agree that they take jobs that could possibly go to US citizens. However the majority of my clients work for businesses that cater to the Hispanic population in my area, and those businesses probably wouldn't exist if there were no undocumented aliens to use their services. As a result my experiences are different than others.

Oh...and in case anyone wonders how they can file tax returns without SSNs, the IRS has a program where they can apply for a ITIN (individual taxpayer identification number) so that they can file their tax returns...and the IRS does not share that information with immigration or Homeland Security.

 

[You Are Guilty]

They pay into social security and medicare and will never receive any benefit from either of those programs.

As a childless citizen that also pays into SS and medicare (and, I assure you, much more than illegals do in other taxes), who in all probability will never see a penny from either program, I find this amusing. To paraphrase Chris Rock, "you're supposed to pay your taxes. What do you want, a cookie?"

But fair is fair. Now that Mexico grants all these "rights" to the Americans who illegally moved there, I will be happy to extend them the same courtesy here. (Mexico does do that, right?)

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Person A = works low-income, underpaid job (employer pays below min. wage because they can get away with it). Spends those earnings in the community where he lives. Cannot qualify for the vast majority of forms of state aid.

That is because person A, being here illegally, will work for whatever wages illegally he can get. Essentially slave labor. He does so, because as long as he, his family and 2 or 3 other families live in one house, they survive long enough to have children and start eroding away at US laws. Though by US standards this is shocking, by standards in his home country it is normal. If he and his family lived alone, they would be living in the US equivalent of a one bedroom efficiency.

Person B = Floats about on welfare, has no intention of seeking work. Can get away with this for extended periods in many states. Entitled to subsidized housing, food, cash payments.

Person B has grown up in a system where many of the high paying jobs have been shipped over seas to Mexico or require a college education for which he/she was not smart enough. An evaluation of the current system has taught them the government wants them to be unemployed, otherwise it would not provide a choice between 1. Working 40 -60 hours a week, if they can find a job, for wages that allow them just enough money to pay their housing, transportation and food costs, with nothing left over for medical or other emergencies or 2. Having a child, staying at home and receiving government supplied food, housing, medical and necessary transportation for free.

I know which one I'd rather have my tax dollars supporting, put it that way.
This is obviously not a black and white issue, and it's easy to fall into the trap of believing the media spin put forward by all "sides" of this.

It is a very black and white issue. We need to remove all the illegals and create enough additional decent paying jobs that allow us to kick all but the disabled and elderly off public assistance. The reason our country is not moving in that direction is because there is too much money being made by the people at the top, at taxpayer expense, in the direction it is going.