 sj |
||
|
||
BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike
|
|
|
Subject: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 26 Apr 06 - 04:16 PM This relates more to the U.S. residents Mudcat. What is your take on this national solidarity strike? Are you going to boycott schools, work, business in general to support it; do you think this is a wacky protest, or are you just going to ignore it and hope it all fades away (good luck if you take that attitude). Are you even aware of it? sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 26 Apr 06 - 04:23 PM It is an unreasonable protest. It is a protest saying "we don't care what the rules are, or whether easy immigration is good for the country in general, we just want things our way, and we will harass you until we get it." Kinda like the kids in the back seat begging for a Coke until Mom stops and buys them one to shut them up. *SOME* of the immigrants' issues are reasonable and need to be addressed...others are just "I want it my way". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 26 Apr 06 - 04:36 PM From my perspective (for what worth that is), is that the immigration issue now facing the U.S. government is a problem that almost parallels the problems of the Iraq war, as if Americans need this at this time .... what do you do, grant legality to 2o million people, then have another 20 million come running up north from Mexico, border security, burden on social services, spin-off movements such as the succession of certain states California, New Mexico, Arizona. It's a movement whose passions they relate to as the American Revolutionary movement for the succession from Britain. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Rapparee Date: 26 Apr 06 - 05:01 PM The protest, I understand, is taking place in Mexico, not the US. And not all Mexicans, by a long shot, support it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: GUEST,Martin gibson Date: 26 Apr 06 - 05:03 PM I think I will have my car washed by some Mexicans that day. Maybe get some fast food and hope they get the order right. also watch a few cut some lawns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 26 Apr 06 - 05:59 PM in Mexico? Why would they...ummm, never mind....Well, then....I suppose Vincente Fox will lead the march. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 26 Apr 06 - 06:17 PM MG ... I think you better get your car washed the day before. May 1st sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 06 - 06:36 PM I've read a protest in the US is planned. I'm very much in favor of the main goal here--a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants--but this is precisely the wrong way to get there. The first marches--especially after they got the message that US, not Mexican flags are the ones to wave--made the scope of the immigration problem plain--and the role illegals and recent legal immigrants now play in the economy. But this one will do nothing but raise the hackles of many in opposition--even on the fence. It will also likely result in some who protest losing their jobs. This protest is also in danger of being combined with other protests--and thereby muddying the immigrants' message. The churches and other pro-immigrant groups are right to put pressure on Congress--that's the way to influence policy--not another street protest. Talk of spinoff movements of "succession" (sic) of CA, NM, etc is nothing but scaremongering--no doubt it's one of Tancredo's favorite themes. New Mexico, for instance is a gorgeous state--but not very wealthy--they need federal government help. California--it's more likely that Northern California would secede from Southern--they are losing their resources to the financial and population clout of Southern California--especially water. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Apr 06 - 06:39 PM "I'm very much in favor of the main goal here--a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants" Ok, Ron, let me hear you admit you agree with George W. Bush on this... BTW, I agree with this statement- PROVIDED they are not jumped ahead of other LEGAL immigrants who HAVE followed the rules. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: JohnInKansas Date: 26 Apr 06 - 08:20 PM Folklore: May 01 - International Workers Day USA?? Merge Threads? John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: dick greenhaus Date: 26 Apr 06 - 08:44 PM You know, the whole Mexican immigration problem would be aolved by simply raising the minimum wage and enforcing it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 26 Apr 06 - 09:52 PM Thanks for pointing that thread out John, I somehow missed that ... I'm more interested in the reactions to the National Solidarity Strike than to the meaning of the traditional and non-traditional meaning of May Day. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 06 - 10:35 PM BB--He agrees with me. I also thought the Dubai debacle was absurd. There he was right also-- but he diligently poisoned the well for himself by stoking anti-Arab fear for years. But he can be right once in a while--like a broken clock. Meanwhile his true believers are tearing themselves apart over the illegal immigration issue. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of Neanderthals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 06 - 10:40 PM Dick's right about the minimum wage--but much the same result will be obtained if large numbers of illegal immigrants become legal--if they're legal it's harder to exploit them--so it will raise wages for everybody on the bottom of the economic pile. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Janie Date: 26 Apr 06 - 10:44 PM The immigration issue is in danger of becoming over-simplified in the mind of many. Here is an article about backlash that is already beginning. Janie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 06 - 11:03 PM But it's only a boost to certain conservative politicians. As I said, the Bushites are now tearing themselves apart over this issue. The business community, by and large--and not just the people in industries which now exploit illegal labor-- is on the other side of the fence, so to speak, from the Minutemen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 26 Apr 06 - 11:20 PM I tend to agree Ron. It is a very difficult issue. Whatever way you swing to remedy it, it is going to cause discontent which will polarize the populace more so than than the right/left factions. With what has been demonstrated in the 'immigration' marches in the last few weeks, it will be interesting to see what comes on May 1st. These people as I mentioned are very passionate about their cause. It will undoubtably bring about a resistance fueled by their own ideals of nationalism and patrionism. Whether Americans are aware of it or not, they are going to have to wake up and face these issues. They will have some difficult choices to make in the near future. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: GUEST,Rapaire Date: 27 Apr 06 - 12:35 AM Actually, the problems in the US stem entirely from the lax immigration policies -- of the American Indian. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Teresa Date: 27 Apr 06 - 02:45 AM Well, one thing that would get a lot of attention is a strike by *all* the illegal workers in the US. I think that would make the average middle-class American pay attention ... when there aren't bus-boys to take plates away, maintenance workers to fix toilets, folks to pick the pretty vegetables that we see in supermarkets, etc. any kind of boycott or protest and the resulting backlash might be the only expression possible of various aspects of an issue that is constantly being swept under the rug. That's my very biased opinion. Teresa |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: JohnInKansas Date: 27 Apr 06 - 03:23 AM The possibility of "backlash" reactions to the planned "march" has been mentioned already, and its signs are beginning to appear. In local news reports on local and regional smaller "rallies" quotations were all of (apparently) illegals yelling about "We just want our rights." So when a burglar illegally enters my home, he has the right to demand that I fix lunch for him? – or so we may think. Much is also heard of "we work and pay taxes here," but one must question just how they pay taxes, since a valid Social Security Number or a Work Visa is required in order to file a Federal Tax Return. If they had either, they wouldn't be illegals - or so one might think. One of the reasons that illegals can work for less is that they can live on below-subsistance wages as long as it's tax free. Unemployed citizens can't, because they would be taxed. In part, - from the "other thread," which has drifted to other subjects. The timing is also a bit "iffy" as this past week Immigration and Customs officers raided *one company, arrested nearly 1,200 illegal workers (out of a total 5,800 employees) in 26 states, and are requesting indictments of a half dozen current and former managers. Forfeiture of company assets is a possible penalty. At least some of the managers are accused of deliberately recruiting alien workers, and of providing falsified documentation for them. By about May 1, the indictments should be popping out, which might make it a good time to be a bit "less assertive" if there is to be any hope of obtaining a more generous treatment. * In the "insult to injury" category, it was a subsidiary of a Dutch owned company. Quite obviously, the above raid came at an opportune time, but since it took more than a year to gather the the evidence, it's a bit difficult to say that it was entirely political. I would like to be sympathetic with the plight of the illegals, but they are beginning to influence me otherwise. I would still hope they may be treated humanely. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 27 Apr 06 - 11:17 AM Teresa ... the intention of the 'strike' is to have all illegal immigrants (regardless of nationality) to join in and boycott. It cerainly would make an impact. Yours is not a very biased opinion, it is an opinion that displays the truth. This issue will have to be reckoned with. However it is resolved it will have an impact that will not only affect the U.S. but all free nations. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: hesperis Date: 27 Apr 06 - 12:03 PM Good point, Rapaire. Protests don't really work well, do they? It seems that it'll only draw attention to the people who are in the US illegally and cause problems for them and their families. It really looks like the only way to have governments listen to the people anymore is to be part of a powerful coalition with lots of money. Protests are just the masses showing up without the power to actually effectively create change. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 06 - 02:13 PM someone..Dick? Ron? will have to explain to me exactly how raising the minimum wage will 'solve' the illegal immigration problem. It would, indeed, improve the situation of many marginal workers, and might be a good idea...but would not a higher minimum wage (AND making illegal workers legal) just be a magnet for more immigrants? I don't see this as a solution...just as a bandaid until we have more immigration than ANY bandaid can cover. Deferring the problem of critical mass does not 'solve' anything...and only makes the explosion larger when absolute capacity is exceeded. Raising the minimum wage and granting more green cards and/or citizenship should only be applied AFTER a controllable policy is implimented. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: jeffp Date: 27 Apr 06 - 02:36 PM Payroll taxes are not the only taxes. Illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Renters also cover their landlords' real estate taxes in their rent. Granted, they don't pay all of the taxes we do, but illegal immigrants who get fraudulent social security numbers to get hired to regular jobs must have social security and payroll taxes withheld and probably don't file to collect any refund. So I'm sure some do pay taxes and some pay Social Security premiums with no hope of collecting any benefits. I wonder if anyone has done a study on that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 27 Apr 06 - 10:59 PM Forbes article 10 April 2006: According to Douglas Massey, Princeton professor, 62% of illegals have taxes withheld and 66% pay Social Security. In 2004 illegal immigrants contributed $7 billion to Social Security $1.5 billion to Medicare Yet they rarely use the services, as previous posters have pointed out,--for fear of deportation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 27 Apr 06 - 11:53 PM "Yet they rarely use the services, as previous posters have pointed out,--for fear of deportation." Now Ron that certainly isn't a statistic from Forbes. Whatever it is it's wrong. One of the benefits of living in the U.S. is access to free medicare. Just do some surfing on the net, you'll find valid information and stats. John in Kansas .. "So when a burglar illegally enters my home, he has the right to demand that I fix lunch for him?" ... no of course not. But when an illigal immigrant says he'll reshingle your roof for the labour cost of $100 and a free lunch you'll take him up on his offer. Thing is, these people have caught on to this. They realize now that they aren't really illegal. That they are a valuable asset and as they are,they want some rights for their efforts. Some fair share of the pie. Is that wrong? sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: dick greenhaus Date: 28 Apr 06 - 03:47 PM Bill D- Simple. The reason illegals are hired (while substantial numbers of citizens are unemployed) is simply that they work cheaper. There aren't any jobs that "Americans won't do"--just jobs that don't pay enough to make it worth while taking. Which accounts for the large-scale importation of Mexican workers, as well as the wetback problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Once Famous Date: 28 Apr 06 - 05:17 PM No citizenship, no job. simple as that. fine companies that hire illegal aliens, whether they are Mexican for from another planet. this is our country, not theirs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Teresa Date: 28 Apr 06 - 06:39 PM Ah, there's a good challenge. I'd like to see a listing of the companies that are confirmed not to hire illegal workers, and also make it a policy. As long as there is cheap labor, companies will use it. What's the incentive not to? Teresa |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Amos Date: 28 Apr 06 - 09:19 PM Gee...let's see how that polcy would work if it were retrofitted over time. All the Blue Blooded Boston descendants, all the Polish descendants, the Irish, the Jews, the blacks and the re-located Anglos of every stripe, the French and German descendants, the Italians, SIcilian and Portuguese descendants...the Japanese, Sikhs, Hindii, Polynesians, Vikings...etc., ...send 'em back where they came from...."after all, this is OUR country, not theirs". We had an open-door immigration policy, or nearly so, for two hundred years. Did the country benefit by it? I think so, ya! Let us not forget what species we belong to. Most of us, anyway. Or that all of our families have benefitted from far-sighted and compassionate policies about what we would have the nation be about. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: JohnInKansas Date: 28 Apr 06 - 10:57 PM Amos - All those you describe were, for the most part, "legal" immigrants under the laws at the time when they came. Your argument is specious. The argument about whether the laws at any prior time were just, fair, and in the hands of the right people is a separate matter. The point here is that every country of which I've heard has its own laws regarding where, how, and under what circumstances and for what purposes persons who are not citizens may enter the country, and in addition when, where, and how they may work there. There is no argument that there are many violations of the law by employers. That there are lots of criminals doesn't make being a criminal a respectable occupation. Fair and reasonable conditions for people from other countries to come to the US and to work here need to be established and enforced. Even those who have deliberately and knowingly violated our laws to come here should be treated as humanely as possible; but NO ONE WHO HAS DELIBERATELY committed criminal acts in coming here can use the claim that it's a "done deal" to claim "rights" of citizens. If we are fair, we may grant (some of) them privileges as our guests, and we may or may not provide a route to becoming citizens. I would hope that we will be as fair as we can be. A fair and equitable penalty for the company cited above, where the company itself provided the forged documentation for 20% of their employees, would be to require that the company provide those employees equivalent or better legal jobs in their nation of origin. (just a thought, but ...) Mexico has sufficient resources to take care of their own people. Unfortunately all the wealth seems to be in the hands of criminals and/or politicians (apparently mostly the same people?) and the people seem all to want to leave. We should take as many as we reasonably can, but it should be done according to our legal processes and procedures. Our current process is very much flawed, but we do have two major employers right here in my home town, with nearly 15% of current employees being LEGAL foreign citizens (mostly Brits and Canadians on green cards, not necessarily preferable to Mexicans? - but LEGAL). I have very grave doubts that our Congress is smart enough, or sufficiently free from influence by the profiteers who are the ones really creating the problem, to come to any kind of solution. Since an apparent majority have also sold their (political) souls to the fundies for whom VENGEANCE AGAINST ANYONE DIFFERENT is the only route to heaven, prospects are additionally bleak. Demanding "our rights" for rights that don't exist for them, is counterproductive. Demanding the observation of "basic human rights" is distinctly different; but has NOT APPEARED in the parades and rallys. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 28 Apr 06 - 11:05 PM 6-- Yes, it is a quote from the Forbes article--10 April 2006, p. 98. I have no idea of the author's source--it appears to be something Massey said. But I don't make up quotes, and certainly not statistics. You're welcome to check. Massey has done surveys--my guess is that it's an extrapolation from a survey--but I have no way of knowing. However, your quarrel is with Forbes or Massey--not with me. I cite my sources--and I wish others would also. Also, regarding Medicare--it is not in fact free in the US insofar as workers are concerned. In many cases an automatic deduction for Medicare is made from a worker's paycheck. This, no doubt, is what the article is citing. So the article's information is plausible--to attack it we would need countervailing facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 28 Apr 06 - 11:55 PM Ron ... I'm not questioning the statistics you provided from Forbes. I'm questioning your statement about Medicare ... frome what I can find out and here, there is a burden to social services. example: washington post article sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 29 Apr 06 - 12:18 AM Dick...I see the argument that illegals work cheaper, and that raising the minimum wage would 'probably' cause more Americans to seek 'those' jobs...(I am not totally sure it would make a huge difference. Stoop labor in fields? You sure? How much would you think it would take to make a significant number of un-employed Americans to pick tomatoes in S. Cal.?) So...assume we do raise it a bunch, and lots of US show up and displace THEM--where do 'they' go? "Oh, shucks...can't get hired, back to Mexico, I guess." Can you see THAT happening? Do we make all 8-12 Million legal like Ron seems to be suggesting? Then who gets the jobs? Do they toss a coin for it? And if we make 12 million legal, what about the next 5-6-9 million who see even HIGHER wages beckoning in "the land of plenty"? I'm sorry, but that policy and plan looks like perpetual motion to me. What have I missed? Where is the part of "raise the wages" and "make illegals legal" that sets ANY limits? Would that not do as I said and just allow the 'critical mass' to be larger and raise prices as well as the wages that are creating the critical mass? At some point, we have to look at the bottom line and ask....how many immigrants can we absorb? Never mind how we did it in 1823 or 1904 and "what this country was founded on"...as John In Kansas says "that argument is specious"....what will WORK now and not cause worse problems later? Imagine a much smaller population...say on a little island one mile square...and a group of 14 castaways who find plenty to eat--for 14; maybe even for 27....and with care, maybe 73. Then an island nearby finds them and sees "the grass is greener" and .....well, there are two ways to look at awkward situations. One is to set a rigid set of 'principles' that say we MUST be welcoming and flexible, and another that says we have to set quotas, boundaries, and limits in some fair & practical way. The sad thing is, 'fair' is not always pleasant. Someone does not always get as much as they want. I could invent metaphors for hours about dividing limited resources among growing populations, but...really....simple math should make all my extra typing unnecessary. I do NOT like the implications of what I see, and I see NO current solutions that are either easy OR reasonable. So...tell me what I have missed. Do NOT tell me about precedent or obligation or some game of musical chairs where no matter when the music stops, someone doesn't find a seat. Just tell me what will work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 29 Apr 06 - 09:20 AM My point is that workers in the US do contribute to Medicare by means of payroll deductions. And the Forbes article states that illegal workers have also thereby contributed--the extent is something we can quibble over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 29 Apr 06 - 09:28 AM Also, even if costs to the federal government were to temporarily rise by making illegals legal---, based on previous immigration, this would be temporary, since as they rose up the economic scale, they would pay more in taxes. As I've said earlier, making them legal would have other benefits, particularly to others on the bottom economic rung--without the potential for exploitation of illegals which now exists ,wages for all low-income workers would rise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 29 Apr 06 - 11:16 AM Well, Ron, you are pointing out little 'facts' ...like 'more taxes' and money into Medicare, and perhaps higher wages for "all low-income workers "...but you still don't address the concerns I noted above about other not-quite-so-wonderful possible outcomes. If wages are higher, so will many prices be higher as management strives to compensate for higher labor costs. This is one of the components of inflation. I'm sure 'some' workers will be better off, but I am not convinced it would be a boon for all...and I still see no answer to the question of "how many can we absorb"? I'm sure that those 8-12 million will be better off & happier than if they had to go back 'home'...what do we do when they CALL home and say "hey...great place here, y'all come."? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: number 6 Date: 29 Apr 06 - 11:25 AM Ron ... I understand fully what your pointing out ... I'm implying that the social costs are are being carried by taxpayers. Now, getting back to the focus of my thread ... I'm wondering what impact Monday's boycott will have ... This is a situation that will polorize the nation more than is being realized, more crucial than the price of gas at the pumps, and just as complicated than the war in Iraq. ... it can't be brushed off with the question, "does this mean we will have to cook our own meals on Monday". sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 29 Apr 06 - 02:12 PM Bill and 6-- Regarding the subject of the thread, all 3 of us are agreed that the 1 May "protest" is a mistake --as I've said from the beginning. Interestingly, Hispanics who are thinking it through are coming to the same conclusion evidently---according to the WSJ today, the WSJ/NBC poll on the topic finds 43% of Hispanics see a boycott as hurting the cause of immigration reform (vs 34% in favor). And leaders like California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez are asking students to stay in school and workers to show up for work on Monday-unless they have the explicit permission of their employers not to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 29 Apr 06 - 02:57 PM well, I do at least agree with that. Upsetting people, causing work stoppages and school attendance issues will not likely raise much support for their cause. 'Reform' is obviously needed, but someone has to work out a better attention-getter than thousand of people chanting "give us what we want". I hope turnout is relatively small, and they re-think their lobbying methods. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 29 Apr 06 - 04:46 PM California and Illinois will be most affected by the strike, the food industries being the worst hit. Something like 2 million of the 'illegals' are Asian, but they keep their heads down while Hispanics get most of the flak. I would be surprised if they joined a strike. A strike only hardens peoples positions. I doubt that any changes will pass Congress this year. Neither party is anxious to attack the problem, although some cosmetic additions to personnel and barriers may be made at the borders. Eventually, a system to regularize the millions of undocumented people will have to be implemented. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: GUEST,Dani Date: 30 Apr 06 - 03:58 PM I have worked in restaurants my whole life, and I can tell you that there certainly ARE jobs that "Americans won't do". They may get hired to do 'em, but they don't last long. The worst, lousiest jobs in food service are being done by a large percentage of Hispanics (both legal and illegal) because (as was the case with so many of our ancestors) they are willing to work. Hard. Politely. Cheerfully. It is VERY VERY HARD to find average (does that mean white?!) Americans of ANY age to do that kind of work. I could tell you stories all day. Dani |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Ron Davies Date: 30 Apr 06 - 11:09 PM You're right, Dani--lots of those jobs. I was just reading about a taxi repair service--which had tried all sorts of Americans. Nobody but Hispanics would do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: dick greenhaus Date: 01 May 06 - 09:31 AM Dani and Ron- What did those jobs pay? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Maryrrf Date: 01 May 06 - 10:06 AM As someone who worked with Quaker groups helping illegal Central American workers in New Jersey for several years I am certainly not anti-immigrant, and not necessarily against some form of protest. But I think the strike today, if it is carried out as planned (well I don't know how much planning there was to it) - but if there is a significant impact - is going to do more harm than good. Just here at work there are already rumblings. It is going to cause resentment and ill will - it won't help their cause in the long run. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 01 May 06 - 10:58 AM If we MUST deal with the fact that a certain amount of jobs, for the forseeable future, need Hispanic workers, then what we need is a system for managed, temporary work permits and a LARGE distinction between that and sneaking in with NO documentation and attempting to melt into the population, start families, and then demand that their status be recognized. Applying for citizenship should NOT be confused with seasonal and other temporary employment. It MAY follow, but under strict guidelines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: John Hernandez Date: 01 May 06 - 11:08 AM Nearly all undocumented immigrants are illegal only in a technical sense. They found jobs while in the United States as tourists or students or they overstayed visas. Some crossed the border without passing through customs and immigration. These people are not hardened criminals. They are not thieves. They are not robbers. They are not rapists. They are not murderers. Those who are should be treated like criminals, just like Americans who commit such crimes. But that's not what most undocumented immigrants are. The congress is now passing a law that will turn all undocumented immigrants into felons. Then they could be sent to federal penitentiaries just like real criminals. That is wrong. I am not saying that the way things are now is right, but turning good people into criminals is not the way to make things better. It will only make things worse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Bill D Date: 01 May 06 - 02:36 PM no, I agree, John...it makes no sense to even consider putting illegals in prison....that would solve nothing. A way must be found to deal with BOTH side of the issue. I suspect the law (IF it passes) will be used much like jaywalking laws, and simply provide a legal basis for dealing with extreme cases. And, I just 10 minutes ago heard a down-to-earth practical result of today's walkout. I was sweeping up the last of some leaves & brush to put in the bags at the curb, as we recycle even leaves & grass clippings and small branches.....along came the collection truck, later than usual. There was only one guy on it rather than the usual two, a young black man. I nodded and said something about "heavy work the time of the season"..(Spring cleanup) He said, "yeah, but I just did this whole route with the trash truck...the Spanish people are off today at the protest....but I'm getting paid double!...The money's good!" so...*shrug* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: tarheel Date: 02 May 06 - 01:11 AM well...where is a RONALD REAGAN,when we need him? i remember the AIR CONTROLLERS strike(or boycott) during the Reagan Adminstration days and the Greatest President of our time Fired Them all!!! Gee,we really miss you Ronnie! Tar... BTW,did you notice how easy it was to TRAVEL on the roads today? hmmmm,maybe they should stay home every day!!! tar... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: May 1st Immigration Solidarity Strike From: Once Famous Date: 02 May 06 - 07:48 PM I actually went to a fast food restaurant and they understood what I was saying and actually got my order right! |
