Immigration & Illegal Aliens
81IMMIGRATION & ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
Americans do not seem to agree on what to do about immigration, legal and illegal. I have a clear idea about how to solve this conundrum.
My solution to the problem of illegal immigration is rather simple. First, we build a wall across our southern border to stop the inflow of illegals sneaking across.
Second, we issue a call throughout the land that all people here illegally must declare themselves. None of them who are working will be deported. Instead, we will issue work visas so that they may stay indefinitely—as long as they are gainfully employed. After a certain grace period, maybe ninety days, we will hunt down and deport any who did not report.
What we will not do is make illegal aliens automatic citizens. This is to test the progressives to see where their hearts really lie. Progressives claim that they only care about illegals out of humanitarian concerns. It is widely known that in fact what they care about is ten million new votes for their policies. So, I propose a compromise: Illegals who are working can stay with the blessing of the United States, but they cannot vote. If this is not satisfactory to progressives, we will have unveiled their true motivations.
THE JOBS AMERICANS WON'T DO
The whole idea that illegal immigrants do the jobs Americans won't do is a myth. Illegal immigrants do the jobs Americans won't do for the wages illegal immigrants will do them for. I propose that any illegal immigrant be paid the same wages as Americans. This will end the exploitation of illegals and put American workers on a level playing field with them.
There are no jobs Americans will not do. I recently took a long road trip by car across the Northwest United States. I drove through countless little towns; stayed in many motels; ate in many restaurants. I saw dozens of maids, waiters, busboys, lawn landscapers, and construction workers—they were all white Americans!
I spent the night in a city of the state of Washington. In the morning I saw a line stretching for blocks outside the window of my room. When I checked out, I asked the lady at the front desk what these folks were doing out there. She said they were in line at the county building to apply for jobs picking apples. There were a handful of Mexicans, but most were white people.
ILLEGAL ALIENS TAKE JOBS FROM AMERICANS
I was in the business of painting private aircraft for more than ten years. I paid American workers an average of $20 an hour to work in my paint shop. Toward the end of my business, I kept hearing regular customers for my other services (fuel, maintenance, etc.) say they were going to Fort Lauderdale to have their planes painted instead of coming to my shop. It seems the prices in Fort Lauderdale at this one particular paint shop were less than half my prices. Instead of paying $20,000 to have a Citation Jet painted, my old customers could now have it painted for $8,000. I could not figure out for the life of me how this could be done, what with overhead and all (health insurance, workers compensation, etc.). So I went to visit this paint shop for myself.
The day I visited the Fort Lauderdale paint shop, several black SUVs came screaming onto the ramp. It was ICE, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. While I was in the office of the proprietor, looking out his window, I saw the ICE agents put twenty men in a circle on the pavement in handcuffs before hauling them away.
I asked the proprietor what was going on. He said, "Ah, they just took my crew away. They'll send them back to Brazil. That's Ok. I'll have twenty more here tomorrow."
I was a stranger but he was quite open about it. He told me that they work for three dollars an hour with no benefits. They send most of the money back home. They know they'll be deported eventually. So, it's like a vacation for them, and a chance to make some real money—compared to what they make in Brazil. So that's how he paints a Citation Jet for $8,000!
IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1965
"This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives." President Lyndon Baines Johnson
The Immigration Act of 1965 completely changed America. Instead of admitting new immigrants based on what special skills they could contribute, we would now emphasize non-European immigration. America was afflicted with this bill because its voters gave the most political power that they have ever given to any one party to the Democrats in 1964—two-thirds of the Senate and House; as well as the presidency.
The ultra-liberal Americans for Democratic Action, the ACLU, and the National Lawyers Guild all fought for this change in immigration policy; as did the Communist Party USA (on the grounds that it destabilizes working Americans and would therefore make Communism more palatable). Today's population is the result of yesterday's immigration policy.
The Progressive proponents of the 1965 Immigration Act claimed it was a logical continuation of the Civil Rights legislation that dominated the political scene during that era. Democrats proclaimed that America's immigration policies were racist and that it was time we allowed people of color from the Third World to come to America and become citizens.
The truth is that people of color consistently provided votes for the Democratic Party. The Progressives of that party thought that with millions of new, reliable voters they could permanently swing the balance of power in America. That same reasoning motivates them today with their plan for "comprehensive immigration reform," which really means to take the ten or twenty million people who snuck across the border into America illegally, and turn them into new citizen voters. Anybody against that idea is branded a racist.
The Immigration Act of 1965 was pushed through the Senate by Ted Kennedy. He had some interesting predictions about the future effects of the bill on America: "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area . . . It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."
Of course, everything he said was wrong and he knew it at the time. A million immigrants a year did flood our cities; immigrant levels did not stay anywhere near the same; the ethnic mix of the country was greatly upset; it did inundate America with immigrants from one country and area, namely Mexico and Latin America; and it has cost American workers millions of jobs. As Senator Kennedy knew it would, but forgot to mention, it upset the balance of power in America. The Boston Globe credited the Immigration Act of 1965 with Obama's election in 2008.
Ted Kennedy predicted in 1965, "No immigrant visa will be issued to a person who is likely to become a public charge." 21 percent of legal immigrants receive public assistance, compared to 14 percent of native-born Americans.
Immigrants from south of our border have a far different view of government than do Americans because of how things work in their countries of origin. Americans understand perfectly "Of the People, For the People, By the People." But Third World peoples have no experience with this. What they do understand is: "If you vote for me I'll give you money."
Hispanic immigrants, by far the largest contingent, are eight times more likely than native born Americans to lack even a ninth-grade education. And they have an average IQ 25 percent lower than Americans of European ancestry. Intelligence is the single most important predictor of success in life, and contribution to society.
What Progressives love to harp on is: "We're a nation of immigrants." This is true. But here they commit the great sin of omission. They leave out the important part, which is: We are a nation of immigrants who came to this country to become Americans.
These earlier immigrants were courageous because there was no safety net in place when we became a "nation of immigrants." There was no Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, or Food Stamps. Immigrants from before the 1960s knew that if you came here you had to make it on your own merit. You do these people a sick injustice when you compare them to people who come here because we offer cradle-to-grave food, shelter, clothes, education, and medical care.
"In light of our 5 percent unemployment rate, our worries over the so called population explosion, and our menacingly mounting welfare costs, are we prepared to embrace so great a horde of the world's unfortunates? At the very least, the hidden mathematics of the bill should be made clear to the public so that they may tell their Congressmen how they feel about providing jobs, schools, homes, security against want, citizen education, and a brotherly welcome ... for an indeterminately enormous number of aliens from underprivileged lands.
"We should remember that people accustomed to such marginal existence in their own land will tend to live fully here, to hoard our bounteous minimum wages and our humanitarian welfare handouts ... lower our wage and living standards, disrupt our cultural patterns ...
"Whatever may be our benevolent intent toward many people, [the bill] fails to give due consideration to the economic needs, the cultural traditions, and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 681-687.)
THE DELIBERATE BROWNING OF AMERICA
In 1970, there were 9.7 million legal immigrants in the United States and 50% of them were white. Today there are 38 million legal immigrants and only 3% of them are white.
The percentage of Americans who are white has dropped from 85% in 1960 to 60% today. White people are now the minority in 35 of the largest 50 cities in America.
The White Race is to become a minority in America by 2042, according to projections made by the Census Bureau. Nearly half of the births in the United States were non-whites in 2010.
This is not the result of some cosmic accident, but rather the result of a plan by Progressive ideologues that see people of color as the natural constituents necessary and vital to accomplish their ultimate goal: The destruction of America.
The composition of the American people has been altered by immigration laws designed by Progressives to create an influx of peoples from the Third World. Once they arrive here, the Progressive ideology of Multiculturalism rejects any unifying vision of Americanization. Instead of a nation of individuals, they want America to be a nation of groups with permanent ethnic ties that bind.
America invited mass immigration from the Third World in the name of equality. We denigrated our own history and culture, and glorified those of the Third World countries from which these immigrants came. Proponents of Multiculturalism insist that new arrivals make no effort to assimilate; to do so they say would be "genocidal," a notion that makes a mockery of real genocide.
BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
Approximately 500,000 babies are born each year in the United States to illegal aliens. Each of them automatically becomes an American citizen because of an old and misapplied law that grants birthright citizenship. This comes from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was passed in 1868.
The purpose of the birthright section of the Amendment was not so illegal aliens could sneak across the border while nine months pregnant and give birth to American citizens. On the contrary, it was so that slaves would automatically be granted citizenship en masse without having to go through immigration procedures. If a slave had been born here, he was automatically a citizen after this Amendment passed.
The United States is the only First World country that has such a law, besides Canada. No country in Europe has birthright citizenship. I can only find twelve countries in the whole world that have it.
A survey done in California found that 15% of all new Hispanic mothers admitted to having come across the border specifically to give birth in the United States so that their babies would be born American citizens. All of the babies' relatives are then eligible to apply for legal immigrant status under the family reunification laws. None of the illegal alien mothers have health insurance or any money, of course, and the cost of these births is estimated at $5B per year.
ILLEGAL ALIENS
Progressives are hell-bent on legalizing the 12 to 20 million people who have snuck across our border. And they in fact want open borders, to welcome all the world's poor to move to America. Their reasons are simple: the world's poor would be voters with little skills or education who would surely vote for Communism. And Communism is the secret goal of Progressives.
Every attempt to seal our border is met by Progressives with the phony line that "only totalitarian nations build walls." That is not true number one, and number two totalitarian countries build walls to keep people IN, not OUT. Nobody ever tries to sneak into a totalitarian country. They try to get out.
Illegal aliens are granted free public education and free medical care across the United States. Some states offer them free, or reduced tuition, college scholarships. 13 states give them drivers licenses.
It is estimated that 3% of the people called for jury duty are illegal aliens. If they are called for jury duty, they can certainly vote.
31 American cities have proclaimed themselves to be "sanctuary cities" for illegal aliens, meaning that they welcome illegal aliens and will protect them from deportation in open defiance of federal immigration law.
87% of illegal aliens who have been deported do not leave the country, they simply disappear. 30% of federal prisoners are foreign-born. Over one million crimes are committed each year by illegal aliens. In Los Angeles, 95% of outstanding murder warrants are for illegal aliens, as well as 67% of all felony warrants.
An estimated 60% of gang members in California are illegal aliens. They are heavily implicated in drug trafficking and sex slavery as well. The people who perpetrated the 9/11 massacres were all illegal aliens.
THE LESSON OF MEXIFORNIA
In the 1970’s, California had the seventh most educated workforce in the nation. Now, the latest census data shows it is at the bottom of the list. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, this is the result of massive immigration from south of our border. As the nation grapples with expanding immigration, California presents a preview of what might happen to the nation’s workforce.
California’s labor force has the highest percentage of high school dropouts in the nation: 16 percent. When only looking at immigrants, the percentage increases to 33 percent. 39 percent of immigrant households are recipients of welfare programs.
COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
Eliseo Medina is the vice president of the radical SEIU; a prominent member of the Democratic Socialists of America; and an advisor to President Obama.
Speaking of Latino voters, Medina said "When they voted in November, they voted overwhelmingly for progressive candidates. Barack Obama got two out of every three voters that showed up. If we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three? If we have eight million new voters we will be creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle."
I have previously published these Hubs of interest:
Alexis de Tocqueville writes about America
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (21)
- Funny (1)
- Awesome (24)
- Beautiful (4)
- Interesting (1)
CommentsLoading...
Vote up!
Cassie Smith— Thank you for reading my article. I appreciate your compliments and I fully agree with your comments.
I looked at your profile page and I am quite pleased to "meet" you. Your titles look fascinating. I will be coming by to read some of your Hubs soon. :)
It is maddening that employers hire illegal aliens and make it hard for law abiding business people to do business. In some places like Texas, California and New York you can't seem to avoid businesses that hire illegal aliens because it's endemic. Great hub.
francisid— Thank you for taking the time to read my article. I sincerely appreciate your gracious compliments. I enjoyed reading your cryptic comments! :-)
dogs bark when there are strangers..people bark when they have nothing to say.criticisms come and go,but they are always one out of ten..your hub is great.people must accept that.
Alastar Packer— Thank you!! I surely appreciate you coming by and inspiring and encouraging me. Your gracious compliments have made my day. God Bless You!!
Hear! Hear! and Triple Cheers James A. Watkins. Your reputation shall precede you sir, as it already does here and wherever you choose to write the truth with your thorough knowledge and brilliant mind.
Master Yoda— Thank you for both of your erudite comments. I looked through my article and I can't seem to find a statistic "1 to 5." Where is that in my article? Maybe I just don't see it. I do not believe any of my statistics are made up. Tell specifically which one you think is and I will provide the official source for the numbers.
Conservative Christians made America great and created this awesome civilization that is by light-years the greatest ever seen on earth. Tell me what other people have made such a great civilization?
This country rightly encouraged immigration back when it was sparsely populated and BEFORE it had any social programs that steal property from some to give to others.
This country was NOT built on Separation of Church and State. Is that term in the Constitution? This country was built on "free expression of religion." Now THAT is in our Constitution.
If my kin is a dying human breed then the world will enter barbaric dark ages. You have better hope your prophecy is untrue.
It was Christians who built Western Civilization and it is that civilization that raised much of the world out of poverty, and to such an incredible standard of living that people a few hundred years ago would scarcely believe it if they could see it.
master Yoda— I should be banned from reproduction? And sweet, courteous, polite, gracious, civil, wise people like you should populate the world?
I am not holding back my country. If you think flooding America with tens of millions of illiterate, unskilled, ignorant people from the Third World will make America great then you are a complete imbecile. If that would make America great, then why aren't the countries they are coming from already great?
Learn something about history before you uncork such asinine opinions on others.
love how u make up statistics like ¨1 to 5¨and whatever other phony bullshit you inserted in your nonsensical post. conservatiove christians are the downfall of the country and christians muslims and jews are the downfall of humanity period. go take you homophobia islamophobia racism mexiphobia and go somewhere. this country was built on the idea of immigration and seperation of church and state. your kin is a dying breed human kind is evolving past racism and religion gtfo!
from interracial chideren to immigrants, you are definitely a racist asshole. please castrate yourself, people like you should definitely be banned from reproduction on this planet. your the perfect example of what´s holding this country back from greatness.
francisid— I agree with you. It is a major problem. And all those opposed to open borders are branded as "heartless" and the ultimate slur of all time: "racist!" :)
--and that is exactly the root which supports the tree of illegal immigrants.somebody is supporting them that is why they thrive.
francisid— I think that Democrats want the illegals legalized and open borders because they know uneducated, unskilled people from the third world will vote for socialism in massive numbers. And why not? "Vote for me and I will take care of you from cradle to grave with money confiscated from other people" always garners votes from those who view themselves as unable to compete.
Thank you for visiting and commenting! :)
silly me— Thank you for taking the time to read my Hub and to comment on it. I am glad you found it interesting. I fully understand your feelings, as a person who has immigrated to the United States the legal way. Welcome to the Hub Pages Community! I llok forward to reading your work.
...that's the saddest point of all.there are a number of people who are willing to sweat it out just to be able to immigrate legally.Why would that be a problem to the rest?
Very interesting hub. As an immigrant who had to work through a ton of paper work, get examined by a doctor, wait for several hours at the American Embassy, and of course pay a lot of money just to be able to get married to the love of my life (who happened to be an American), I feel somewhat cheated by the people who make their way to the States illegally.
francisid— Thank you for reading my article. I appreciate your comments. And I agree with you.
Parasitism is a strong word but somehow appropriate. The root cause, I would say, is a Mexico that doesn't know how to govern or produce success. And that is mired in third world levels of corruption. The US could help by ending the stupid "drug war."
The other part of the root cause is the bleeding heart liberals in America who are committed to provide for the whole world's needs if it bankrupts America or not, and if it creates dependents who are no longer free people or not.
the solution is quite simple-- cut out the roots that support the tree.
with the illegal immigrants problem,pruning is no longer enough.what is needed is to identify what's behind the resurgence of the millions of people illegally bathing in the resources which are meant for legal settlers.sometimes,a bigger figure is behind that's why it overshadows the real cause.but as long as we haven't identified the root cause of these illegal immigrants,we'll forever be bathing in the lake of parasitism.
Gail Anthony— You are welcome. I appreciate your kind compliments. Thank you for taking the time to read my article and respond.
I was not aware that "millions" of illegal aliens come through our ports. I would have thought that customs & immigration would have checked this flow.
I agree that illegal aliens do not vote legally. But they do vote. Motor voter laws make it nearly impossible to check legal status.
I think you might be surprised who will vote for a demagogue promising free this and free that if elected. This has a powerful attraction for the poor, legal or not.
Your comments are excellent. Welcome to the Hub Pages Community!
James, You wrote a detailed, interesting, and informative piece that I enjoyed but there are two items regarding your solution upon which I have to comment. Building a wall across our southern border would not stop the millions of illegal aliens that come in through Boston, New York, Baltimore, and Miami. These illegals are African, Hispanic, and African. 35 years working in my prior profession taught me that illegal aliens couldn't give a rat's fanny about Democrats or Republicans. If they have any children that are born in this country, those children might take a political position. However, no illegal alien votes legally.
Thanks for a good piece of writing.
tonymac04— You are welcome. Thank you for reading my work and leaving your comments.
A nation is: A people who share common customs, origins, history, and language; a nationality.
Are you in favor of a One World Government? Do you believe that any nation has a right to a border? Do you believe that any nation has a right to control who is within its borders?
The United States takes in a million legal immigrants a year. Are you saying that is not enough? Do you believe that all people on earth should be able to pick up and go live anywhere on earth they want, and immediately qualify for the largess of those states that have a huge welfare apparatus in place? Do you believe that all people have a RIGHT to the wealth and income of other people?
American taxpayers gave, through their government, $100 billion to the third world from 1950-1980 and yet most of the recipients found themselves in roughly the same shape at the end as they were in the beginning. This remains the biggest act of national generosity in human history by far.
The government also sent tens of thousands of techical experts to the third world to share its bounty of knowledge in industrial techniques, food production, railroad efficiency, modern mining, public health, and government administration. The work and charity done by American Missionaries around the world has been unprecedented in human history, at great danger to themselves and at tremendous cost. Private citizens in America give more to charity than any government.
The economic success stories have come without exception from countries that have embraced free enterprise: Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, India, and China.
You are right that political will is absent, but it is absent in the poor countries themselves. There is a direct correlation between property rights and lack of poverty, for instance. The Rule of Law is missing in the Third World, which is full of homegrown corruption.
Naturally, the defense budget of the United States is higher than say France or other NATO countries. We have been protected them for 60 years at our expense! And you can't go by the figures of Socialist regimes such as China because their information is secret while ours is public.
You make many good points, my friend. There is nothing I would rather see than all people on earth well fed, well housed, and well clothed. And well educated.
Leviticus 19: 33 & 34: "When an alien settles with you in your land, you shall not oppress him. He shall be treated as a native born among you, and you shall love him as a man like yourself, because you were aliens in Egypt."
James - you talk about "Hispanics" and "Americans" - Hispanics have as much right to be called "American" as any citizen of the US since they were born on the American continent of European anscestry, by the way. Which just shows how artificial "national" borders are.
There is actually a very simple answer to the "problem" of "illegal" aliens - if the world's richest countries would contribute hugely to the development and education of people in the poorer countries the "problem" would go away because better educated, housed and fed people don't need to go elsewhere and their fertility rates go down dramatically. They will stay at home.
The US is immensely rich and so acts as a magnet for those who are struggling. Quite normal. Every human being wants to make a better life for themselves and their families. To reduce the magnetic effect help improve the standard of living in the other countries.
The United Nations has a programme called the Millenium Development Goals which aims to do just that. If the US would invest say half of the approximately $850 billion it spends on defense in the development goals the defense spending would be made unnecessary.
The solution is simple and would not add to the tax burden of US citizens. But of course the political will is no doubt absent. Arms manufacturers make too much profit from their businesses to want to see peace prevail, and they control politics.
But really the answer is simple and relatively cheap - educate people. It has been found across all cultures and races in all countries - the better educated especially the women are, the lower the fertility rate. And the lower the fertility rate the more a society is able to succeed in all areas.
We have similar problems in South Africa although we are not nearly as rich as the US. We also struggle with these issues with far fewer resources to deal with them. And I sould say to our lawmakers too - export development and education to the countries from which people are flocking to South Africa. And indeed South Africa is participating in the NEPAD (New Programme for African Development) which was actually initiated by our former President Thabo Mbeki. It's a programme which faces many problems, not least of which is the lack of money that is endemic on the continent. But at least it is a start in the right direction. And most countries on the continent are working hard to achieve the Millenium Development Goals.
Thanks for an interesting Hub.
Love and peace
Tony
mrgwr— Your sharp rebuke in your first sentence made me go back and read my article again. Right near the top I said illegal aliens, who are criminals—meaning it is a violation of United States Criminal Code to be in this country illegally—should be able to stay as long as they want as long as they are working. And that they should be paid as much as a citizen for the work they do. What is it you want?
All I said about race was that radical left-wingers, who are socialists or communists, push for the massive importation of people of color for political power, since people of color are natural constituents for socialism and or communism—this can be plainly seen in their voting record. That is absolutely true. Are you saying that to speak the truth is inherently racist?
I never said America was only for white people, nor did I imply it. I have to wonder if you even read my article. I did offer practical solutions, which you do not address in your hurry to instead call me names, the typical progressive response (Ad Hominem attacks). I see no practical solution offered by you in your comments.
Yes, America was once a great melting pot. But that is decidedly not the aim of progressive multiculturalists. Their aim is to destroy the melting pot and promote group identity and privileges.
I totally agree with you that we have a terrble education system. I have written about this twice, most recently here:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Education-Problems-in-Publ
Thank you for visiting. I appreciate your comments.
Furthermore if you want to talk about something that is really affecting this country, how about the fact that while the amount of knowledge in the world right now is growing exponentially and the need to invest in our future through quality education and by improving our educational system, government continues to make cuts in funding to education, while the rest of the world is investing more and more in the future of their respective countries by trying to improve education and by investing in the children of their respective countries on all levels so that they can better compete in the world in the coming future but we cut funding for education. How totally retarded is that?!!!!
It must be great to be a racist SOB who thinks that the United States is only for white people. Ignorance is an unfortunate thing because it is so widespread and feeds off of it self without offering any real practical solutions. It would be better to try and educate as many people of the worldas possible that come to our country so that they can contribute to our excellence as a nation. In cse you don't realize all of us came from somewhere else at some point in history and that great melting pot that is America has enabled many thoughts, inventions, and ideas that would have otherwise been repressed to blossom and contribute not only to our advancement but to the advancement of the world.
magnoliazz— I appreciate the vote of confidence. Thank you for the accolades. I would run for office but there may be some skeletons in my closet. :D
I can see why it irks you that illegal aliens receive free medical care and social services, which, as you say, are eventually paid for by American taxpayers. Illegal aliens do seem to get benefits that native born Americans do not get.
I do not think we should provide benefits for anyone who hates our country and what it stands for.
You make a good point about immigrants coming here legally and illegally to live off the largess of working Americans. Many progressives point to compassion, but mostly to the waves of immigrants 100 years ago—without mentioning that those immigrants came when we had NO safety net save local charities.
I think most Mexicans do come here to work. But surely our social services package is a HUGE incentive to come here. Any progressive that denies that is lying, period.
Thank you for visiting my Hub. I appreciate and agree with your astute observations.
James, you did it again! An awesome hub, you make so much sense. You should run for office, I know I would vote for you. We need your good common sense in Washington.
You know what irks me? The Mexicans all get free health care in our county, which my tax dollars pay for. One day I took the a friend to "La Clinica", where English is a second language by the way, and I see all these fancy new SUVs all over the place, and yes, they belonged to the Mexicans who are getting free health care with my property tax dollars. Hmmmm, makes you wonder.
I drive up in an old beater truck, because after paying all those property and school taxes I am just about broke for the year. BTW, I don't get free health care either.
Don't get me wrong, I am more than happy to help out my fellow tax payers if they should fall on hard times, but why should I have to pay for someone from another country, who pretty much hates America, and figures we somehow OWE all this free stuff to them?
Not to mention that the Mexicans shoplift so bad that there are but a few gift shops left in our county and they are going under too because of all the Mexican theft. They WANT to get caught for shoplifting, county jail is like a vacation for them....and of course, once again, I get to pay for that too.
If the Mexicans want to stay here, they should have to do it without all this government aid. They don't want to come here to work, they want to come here to get free housing, food and medical care and the whole time they hate America and Americans.
Now I am not saying they are all like that, I have plenty of Mexican friends who did it the right way and became an American citizen, and they feel the same way I do about their fellow Mexicans.
Sam— WOW Sam! You made quite a statement here. You know what, I absolutely agree with you. I hadn't looked at it from this angle. Thank you for opening my eyes.
Our politicians are allowing the Hispanics to sneak in illegally with an intention to compete with the workforce available in China. But there are several major differences between these Hispanics and Chinese. Chinese are patriotic about China (even though we say they are not) - Hispanics are patriotic to their own countries Mexico, etc. Hispanics want to take back Texas and California into Mexico - Imbecile Idea - but they have it. Chinese are hard workers - Hispanics work hardly. They are more into luxuries not available in their countries. Chinese work legally work legally for their country - Hispanics work illegally here but for their own countries. Chinese have their own language - Hispanics have lost their language completely and speak Spanish, how stupid can these people be! They are proud to speak Spanish, the language of their rulers! Chinese have talent, training and intelligence - Hispanics have none of these. How can these Hispanics make our country as hard working as China!!!
shynsly— Welcome to HubPages! I tried to draw the traitors out of the woodwork with this piece. :)
I see you live in Arizona so you would know more about this than I would, plus have much more stake in the outcome I would imagine.
I absolutely love your idea of putting illegals to work in prison making cheap products! Ha! That's an awesome idea.
Thank you for the visit and your excellent comments.
I admit, I'm a simple-minded schmuck and generally fully support kicking ILLEGAL immigrants out, 1st offense: mandatory deportation with finger prints taken. 2nd offense: jail time in "special" border prisons where their labor is exploited to cheaply produce products WE can export to CHINA even more cheaply then China's crap can be imported here...
That being said, in the interest of showing what the liberals and progressives truly want, I find myself thinking you may very well be on to something...
RTalloni— I'm doing the best I can! The support and affirmation from you and others makes it all worthwhile for me. Thank you. :-)
"everything he said was wrong and he knew it at the time" must be the proverbial understatement of the century.
Keep raising the bar for balanced thinking!
swift— I don't think the whole word wants to live in America. Far from it. Plenty of people are perfectly happy just where they are. It is home, after all. And it is probably in a society that shares their culture and world view.
I do not believe the wars were started under false pretenses. The abuse in prisons you are talking about a handful of people. In any war there are atrocities committed by bad seeds.
The occupation of Palestine? There is no such thing. Try reading the truth about it here:
"That is one of the greatest things about America: Anybody can make it big here."
I cannot argue with that. I was in America over 11 years ago, and one of my host families were rich Malaysians, who came to US some decades ago with nothing.
In fact I remember another hosts of mine, she was an Egyptian kopt and her husband was German, they were truly rich - she came with nothing and made her own travel agency, he was architect.
But do not tell me that Americans are so free spirited, they are not, or at least they do not seem to me.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" - this is wonderful, but you see, you believe in this as a American citizen, and for American use, within America, not outside.
What makes you think, that the whole world wants to live in America? :-))
I like the thought that your government does not tread on the rights of its citizens. What about the rights of people in Iraq for example. Weren't their rights tread upon, when under completely false pretence US and UK attacked their country? And all the abuse that happened there in the prisons, done by US soldiers including women - is that a mark of free, civilized society?
And is not that laughable in the face of the occupation of Palestine, where US is the black hand behind the scenes supporting Izrael with all the weapons, including nuclear arsenal?
JamesCanton— I mean that multiculturalists, hell bent on destroying America because they hate her, have denigrated American history and culture while they praise the failed cultures of the Third World, in order that by this brainwashing of our youth, they make America appear not worth defending. In other words, they teach that putting a bone throught your nose is equal to putting a man on the moon.
I am about 1/4 Cherokee.
swift— There is no aristocracy in America. Many of our richest people came up from nothing. That is one of the greatest things about America: Anybody can make it big here.
The United States Declaration of Indepedence says this:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
This means that our rights come from God, and government should be below our rights, not above. If we do not have our natural rights we are born with, given to us by the Creator of the Universe, it is only because men (a government of men) has intruded upon them and taken them away. This means that the rights of Americans do not come from our government. Our government merely acknowledges them and doesn't tread on them.
The United States has had immigration laws since 1790. America welcomes over a million legal immigrants each year—far more than any other nation and the vast majority of them are from the Third World. Where in that equation do you see racism or xenophobia?
Christians didn't start slavery. Slavery existed long before the time of Christ. It was an accepted part of life on this planet. It was considered normal. You and I don't consider it normal. But you can't judge people living in the past by current standards. You must judge them by the standards they knew.
Hxprof— You provided an outstanding explanation, my friend. Not much I can add to that. Thank you very much.
swift— I appreciate your point of view. Should not countries have borders then?
Should the United States let the whole world come here and live then?
What about other laws, should we keep those or disregard as well?
How would you feel if someone snuck into your home through the sewer or a basement window? Would you welcome them then?
I don't believe that idea that America's wealth is made off the third world. That is a myth. If it is true, explain how it is done. I'll tell you another myth: that wealth is created off the backs of laborers. Think for a minute: 100 years ago China, Russia, India, and Africa all had far more broad backs or laborers than did America and we left them in the dust. Wealth comes from ideas, invention, ingenuity, and innovation—the stuff America was made of.
Americans hate socialism because we've been free for far too long. With socialism out goes freedom and liberty. The state has to be all powerful to equalize everybody's possessions. Americans see the results of Socialism in North Korea, Cuba, USSR, Eastern Europe, and China—100 million murdered, people enslaved.
Yes they are all equal—ALL equally poor.
Rod Marsden— Well, I must say you came back in with a whole lotta good points. I appreciate your contributions to this discussion. We may be halfway to solving the world's problems. Thank you! :D
What do you mean, "We denigrated our own history and culture, and glorified those of the Third World countries from which these immigrants came." Are you a Native American?
Hxprof, thanks for explaining. In certain way it does make sense. But there are two or more sides to everything. For example when you say: "People were deprived of property they'd earned through their hard work and the work of those who willingly accepted pay to work for them." Lot of this property was gained on the back of the poor, who perhaps "willingly" worked there, because they had no other choice. Why should only the rich enjoy the abbundance of forests and fields, only because in the past they got somehow into power through some favours to the aristocracy, while the poor were prosecuted if they have stolen a piece of bread to have something to eat.
"Right given to us by God" - I am not socialist, and I do believe in God. But sometimes I am perplexed, what is the American notion of the "rights given to us by God"
James A Watkins - said that the first migrants that came to America had nothing guaranteed, but they had also no border agencies waiting for them, no prejudices, no restrictions, nothing. In fact, it was hard, but it was a heaven on earth. Unspoiled. If you worked hard, you achieved something. There were no detention centres with bullish cops waiting there, were they? But now, even if someone is trying to work hard, there is prejudice, xenofobism, paranoia, racism etc.
Indeed, Europeans ending slavery - well, you can put it this way, if you like. The slavery that was going on between Africa, Britain and America was on the biggest scale imaginable, before and since. It would be nice, if the people who were calling themselves Christians did not ever started it, they would not have to boast about "ending" it.
Swift, I'd like to offer a brief answer to your question: "why the Americans hate the idea of socialism so much? What is so scary about it?"
The world has seen the mayhem caused by communist and socialist dicators. Tens of millions of people were killed under Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler (National Socialist), Pol Pot, etc. People were deprived of property they'd earned through their hard work and the work of those who willingly accepted pay to work for them. Much of the initial wave of Cuban immigration to America in the early-mid 60's was of the wealthier segment of Cuban society-certainly those who had the most to lose as Castro seized control of the economy.
What is scary is to have to rely on the government to provide for our needs; reliance on self, our family, friends, neighbors and ultimately on God to provide for us is a sure way to avoid becoming dependant upon an entity which can and WILL take away what it provides if we don't 'play ball'. That is the whole point of our Constitution: Rights given to us by God, not by government; created equal, but equal results not guaranteed. When we allow government to step in to try and equalize the results we lose our rights to that government.
Americans resist any kind of tyranny regardless of the benefits because we lose everything else when we do that, and we risk then the loss of those 'benefits' provided by government because the government no longer has to answer to us. That's what is so scary!
"and poor people migrating to a country that offers free food, housing, clothes, medical care, education, etc.—all confiscated from other people's earnings."
but the immigrants, at least the majority of them, want to work, or no? they want to earn their living, if they get the chance! for example the Mexicans, who are crossing the boarder are working, illegally, but working to send home some money to their families.
And why should not the Third World, as it is called, profit from the so called "civilized, developed world" when quite a big piece of the the "Western civilization"'s profit is on the back of the third world countries.
I do not disagree that there are individuals whose main objective is to take advantage of the system, but those are even between Americans themselves. So why always point the finger at the immigrants.
And finally, what is wrong with socialism. In fact, my parents were prosecuted by communists, but even they had to admit, that the division in society were much more balanced, more equal and in certain ways fair. Not completely fair of course, because the people with party connections had always some kind of privileges, but in general it was much more fair than the "democratic" system - which is really just an empty label, because true democracy have never existed, does not exist and it never will. I experienced communism only as a child, but one of its positives were, that I do not recognize any class system. Most of the people - doctor or university lecturer, or a shop assistant were living in the same building. Perhaps it seems weird, but that is how it was.
I wonder, why the Americans hate the idea of socialism so much? What is so scary about it?
In some parts of the USA it is true that people do eat too much for the present. It is also true that in other parts of the USA people are thin and undernourished. Just like in other Western style countries it isn't a fair balance across the country.
Desperate people do horrible things Hxprof. This may not excuse them but it provides some understanding and insight. If Red China had kept going the way it was going with population there would have been mass starvation especially in the south of the country. What they did was brutal, sure, but they could see no alternative. Creating a better alternative for other countries, other places, other people would be the way to go.
I also agree that too much is spent on war. India and Pakistan especially. I was amazed to see in Janes just how much India has in the way of ships and planes of war yet many of her people live in poverty.
God may have made an earth that can sustain a lot of people but there are still limits.
Yes, fresh drinking water for a number of reasons has become a big issue. In Australia and the USA rising salt has become a threat to agriculture. When the water turns salty it is no good to drink and no good for the plants. There is some evidence that Mesopotamia ended its days as a city because of rising salt. There are past civilizations in central America that also collapsed due to lack of fresh water and also possibly the rising salt issue.
James, I am glad you mention the fact that quite a few other races that were and are not white have also been involved in slavery. Slavery is an abomination and it is unfortunately part of our collected history. This does nothing for the generational guilt involved.
Ravaged Nation— Thank you for your kind comments. I wouldn't say you don't have the ability. You are just getting started here. Welcome to the Hub Pages Community! I'll be by soon to read your latest Hubs.
Hxprof— As always, you make excellent points that get down to the heart of the matter. Thank you very much, my friend, for coming by to share your insights. I know you have worked on the border, so few would know more about this than you.
Wish I had the ability to write a Hub like this and generate as many great comments. When I see all these comments, it encourages me to believe that eventually the people that believe in American excellence will once again control the legislature. As far as Global Visa's comments let me chime in...you are racist because you even exist. So am I though...so I feel I am in good company.
Global Visas— Welcome to the Hub Pages Community. Thank you for reading my article and leaving your comments.
I simply reported the facts. Facts aren't racist. They are merely facts. I am not sure what you are talking about. Is it this?
"The White Race is to become a minority in America by 2042, according to projections made by the Census Bureau."
That comes from the U.S. Census Bureau. Are they racists for making that statement? Or am I racist for quoting them?
Rod Marsden— If there is a problem with meals in America it is that we eat way too much. Look at the lineup at the welfare office—fat, fat, fat. Hardly the look of real poor people, such as those in Biafra or Bangladesh.
You are surely right that the world is finite. Your comments are well received. Thank you for engaging. I appreciate your insights.
itakins— Yes, you are absolutely right about the bailouts of bankers. I was and am totally opposed to that. I agree that those "elite" folks should not be shielded from moral hazard, while regular folks suffer the consequences. That money surely would have been better spent on the poor, or not spent at all.
You are welcome. Thank you for sharing your keen insights with us.
Gypsy Willow— I hear you. It is a difficult subject alright. My main point is that there are people who want to flood the country with poor people for the express purpose of destroying America. And people who want to limit this flow to protect America from being destroyed.
swift— My family tree? Well, I am perhaps 1/4 Cherokee. Beyond that, I come from mostly Welsh stock—hardly a race of people with a history of oppressing others.
Yes, the first white Americans were immigrants. The chief difference that needs to be remembered is that these immigrants came to a world with no safety net. It is a bit different to emigrate to a land with cradle to grave support from other people's earnings. It is more difficult to compare the two groups than to simply say they are all immigrants. On the one hand you have a movement of people from the most civilized part of the earth to what was then the Third World. Now you have the Third World emigrating to the most successful country in the history of earth. Quite a different thing.
Surely you know that Europeans were not the only people who have engaged in slaughter or slavery. Both have been going on since time began and are still going on. Slavery was once worldwide. If anybody ended slavery in this world, it was the Europeans. They didn't invent it—they ended it. Slavery is still a major problem in much of the world. Slaughter still goes on.
If you don't know why I mentioned color then you missed the whole point of this article. White progressive socialists figured out long ago that people of color favor socialism and anti-Americanism—as white progressives do. Therefore the mass movement of people of color here is no accident. It is part of a plan to seize political power of the most wealthy nation on earth, for the purpose of imposing a socialist state, or as some believe, a worldwide government of socialism—an ideology that is anti-American at its core. You wrote:
"Why do you deny the right to settle in a new country for others, when you claimed that right for yourself? And at the end of the day, who emmigrated to America or to Australia from Europe? Most of the people were poor"
You are correct. You apparently do not understand the difference between poor people migrating to a land where they were guaranteed absolutely nothing; where they had to fend for themselves or die . . . and poor people migrating to a country that offers free food, housing, clothes, medical care, education, etc.—all confiscated from other people's earnings.
Rod, the Red Chinese are brutal-period. I have no sympathy for a government that uses such heavy handed methods to limit population growth; there's no excuse for it.
The earth is obviously finite-no doubt about it. I don't believe that the earth's resources are as finite as we might think. There's evidence that oil is still being produced by the earth. Coal is tremendously abundant. Water is MORE finite than we used to believe, but we reduce what's available to us by polluting much of it.
The earth's governments spend countless resources on weaponry-imagine how many resources would be available for food production, generation of energy and the creation of new technology to assist us in getting the most out of the resources available to us.
I'm not suggesting that we stop making weapons; the unfortunate fact is that war will be with us until Christ comes to establish His Kingdom. My point is that God made an earth that is able to sustain a great number of people-how many we don't know-and IMO no scientific studies will be able to tell us how many people can live on earth.
I have never read such a racist article in my life. By calling yourself "the White Race" (and in capitals no less), you make this a case of "us vs them". I'm ashamed to share the same skin colour as you.
James, children will only grow up to take care of their elders if they get the three meals a day they need plus hope for as good as if not better future. Too many people and those three meals may not happen.
In Ethiopia those three meals don't always happen. In the Middle Ages in Europe those three meals were also dodgy.
In the 17th and 18th Centuries Europeans including the British solved their population problems through conquest of the New world and through mass migration to the New World. Now there is no New World to speak of.
The world is FINITE. It can be seen from space. Fresh water to drink is not growing. Some parts of the world such as Australia are discovering that it is shrinking. Places to grow food are also shrinking rather than growing. There have been documentaries on the extinction in some waters of what were once popular breeds of fish. What do you think happens when there is infinite population growth on a FINITE world?
I vote for education rather than forcing anyone to do anything against their will. What the Red Chinese did they did because they were desperate. Let us hope that the USA and Australia never become that desperate.
itakins— Once again you make outstanding points that must be considered when ruminating on this subject. Thank you for engaging. Yours is an erudite voice.
Chasuk— Thank you for providing that link. It is an interesting article. The entire Eugenics movement was based on IQ and fertility rates. For a brief sample you may go here:
Rod Marsden— You are right that malnourishment hampers the development of intelligence. That's a very good point, friend. Children were once seen as the greatest of blessings. Yes, they had to be fed. But they grew up to care for their elders, too.
James
We must take care of the poor in our midst, of course. We should take that responsibility ourselves—not shuck it off the government. Remember the government doesn't have any money. It only takes our mone'
I am a bit like a creaking door at this point....yes it is our money ,and Western govts have wantonely wasted OUR money by bailing out the banks -the super rich elite of the world-who should have had to accept the consequences of risk ,like the rest of us.
Meanwhile so many wrongs in the world could have been put to right ...
Thank you for allowing me speak ...so frequently.
brandonhart100— You are welcome. I hope I was not offensive. I surely don't mean to be. I agree that something has to be done. Thank you for your kind regards.
Reading the comments to your excellent article it shows that there are such heartfelt opposing views on the matter that it will be almost impossible to reach agreement. I can see good points on both sides but the chance of a compromise look very slim if not impossible!
mamatetis— You are welcome, and thank you for visiting my Hub. I looked at your Hub and it is very interesting. I appreciate the link. Welcome to the Hub Pages Community.
lender3212000— You may well be right about that. I appreciate your insightful remarks. Thank you for coming! :D
itakins— Actually, I do not want people who are different treated differently. I do want people treated the same. I simply view that differently than you do. For everybody to be treated equally means to be treated equally under the classic understanding of the Rule of Law:
"In a free country, the Rule of Law does not apply only to particular persons. It is intended only to be instrumental to the pursuit of various individual ends. It is intended for long periods of time, so it is impossible to know if it will assist some people more than others. It helps people predict the behavior of those with whom they must collaborate, but it does not aid the effort of particular persons.
In other words, the Rule of Law is blind. It does not know in advance which individual it will assist; it does not choose between particular persons or particular ends. It serves to create new opportunities for all, but the precise results remain unseen. This is what it means for legislation to be impartial."
If laws are passed for massive confiscation of the wealth some have earned so it may be "redistributed" to others, both sides are not being treated equally (blindly) by the Rule of Law. While the intention is good—laws to help the downtrodden—once the State is no longer bound by its people to apply the Rule of Law equally to everyone—and if the State confiscates my income and gives it to you then you are being treated better UNDER THE LAW than I am—then the State has gained awesome powers that it will only relinquish by revolution.
We must take care of the poor in our midst, of course. We should take that responsibility ourselves—not shuck it off the government. Remember the government doesn't have any money. It only takes our money.
itakins— In your comments to Rod Marsden, you made serious points that needed to be made. The freedom to go forth and multiply is perhaps the oldest human freedom. I agree with you that it is dangerous to allow state population control. After the young are reduced, it will be time for the old. Then the disabled, and perhaps the weak minded. And how about the useless? And who decides who should go?
"America invited mass immigration from the Third World in the name of equality. We denigrated our own history and culture, and glorified those of the Third World countries from which these immigrants came."
Please, let me remember YOUR history. ALL of the ancestors of the white Americans were once immigrants, weren't they? There was not a white face in Americas before 15th century. (If we do not count the assumptions that perhaps Vikings arrived in the north before the Europeans)
Your glorious past and history is based on the slaughter of the natives, slavery, ratial inequality etc.
Why do you bring in the colour? What is so special about whites? I am a white European, but I have never ever had the notion to feel superior about myself, just because of my colour.
Why do you deny the right to settle in a new country for others, when you claimed that right for yourself? And at the end of the day, who emmigrated to America or to Australia from Europe? Most of the people were poor, with no future in Europe, people who were persecuted in their countries for their views or beliefs, lot of them were also escaped prisoners or outlaws, or people who were unable to find a job and provide bread for their families. Those were your anchestors. But it seem that the white Americans, so proud of their history, do not remember all this.
Sorry for any grammar or spelling mistakes, English is my second language.
Please, make us look into your family tree, to see, what was the country of origin of your great great grandfathers.
"@ R Marsden-two children can best be fed and better educated on whatever salary father and mother bring in thus better ensuring their future in a competitive world Educated people know this and understand this.
Very flawed and simplistic economics Mr Marsden-any child can only eat a limited amount of food,regardless of resources available.......or does a child from a 2 child family eat 3 boiled eggs at once, as opposed to a child from a 6 child family ,who only gets one !
I do believe the quality of the food may just be more important than the amount...or in many cases in western culture the excess!
@James A Watkins: I haven't seen studies that demonstrated that the less intelligent were having more children, only the less educated.
Read this study, for example:
James, too often there is a catch 22 when it comes to intelligence and overpopulation. A person who is used to three square meals a day from very young in life onwards will have a better chance of reaching their full potential intelligence than someone on, say, two meals or only one meal a day. Hence people in poor countries with poor diets may not reach their full potentials for this reason. This diet catch 22 was evident in Europe in the Middle Ages.
To me economics in general works this way: two children can best be fed and better educated on whatever salary father and mother bring in thus better ensuring their future in a competitive world Educated people know this and understand this.
Chasuk— Generally, more intelligent people are capable of going further in their education. There is a difference between education and intelligence. But plenty of studies have shown that the less intelligent of the human race are having far more children.
Rod Marsden— To educate people is good. I'm not sure that advanced peoples are having less children solely because of economics. I see some nihilistic narcissism at play. The number one reason children are aborted is that they are inconvenient. I, personally, applaud people that have numerous children in advanced societies, among peoples who are dying out demographically. If there is a population problem, it is in poor societies, I think.
A. Bershadensky— Thank you very much for reading my work. I appreciate the two thumbs up! Welcome to the Hub Pages Community.
James, thanks for taking the time to write a quality article on a difficult issue.
In my opinion you were both thorough and expressed your ideas in a concise way that could offend some, but also will inspire others. Clearly something has to be done about this pressing issue.
Hello, i found this hub useful and informative, thank you. I would also like to invite You to my own hub http://hubpages.com/hub/failhub its like failblog, just better :) Hope you publish a new hub soon!
Sadly, it's going to take a major disaster such as drug war violence spilling over the border or a terrorist attack for any real change to take place. Great article!
James-
I acknowledge where you are coming from.
However,I abhor the suggestions that peoples of ??lesser intelligence or education can be treated differently. . Differences in individual cases i.e desperate migrants reflect as often as not the burdens imposed on already poor individuals and families by a selfish and self-fixated westernised culture, that is already eroding and fragmenting precisely because of its appalling moral insensitivities: yes, I know all about the Government ‘Aid’, including the fact that as often as not it too is skewed towards the self-interest of the State.
Speaking of the State takes me to the suggestions by ‘Mr Marsden... ..Because of ‘finite resources’ the State should take to itself powers to limit family size. The single most important ‘resource’ is the creativity’ embedded in the human Person-it is this creativity that drives innovation and creates solutions to all kinds of resource constraints.
Family sizes in Europe have dropped to an irrecoverably low point-and this includes Ireland!
Surely , James the whole point is that, the innate dignity of the Human Person is the only reasonable starting point in any discussion that has to do with a life worth living -and on policies that bear one way or another on a world worthy of this Personhood.
And with that suggestion I will sign off!
@Rod Marsden-
I am not spooked by the bogeyman of the ‘finite resources’ argument: I do believe that we should take care of our environment.
But I am seriously spooked by the proposition that the State should take from people rights that precede, and take precedence over, the ‘rights of the State’. As to the argument that the policy of China on issues from controlling family size,(which of course includes wide scale abortion ,especially of baby girls, and infanticide), have anything to teach us, other than that there is no evident limit to the evil of State totalitarianism.
I find your suggestions and views repulsive in the extreme-in fact, I am reminded of the man who instigated the death of 6 million Jews, 400,000 gypsies and God knows how many other human beings.
@Rod Marsden: Almost uniformly, it is the less educated who have more children. Thank you for making the distinction beteeen education and intelligence. Sadly, a many people don't comprehend the difference.
I propose education rather than forcing anyone to do anything against their will, James.
For many races and cultures in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, including the English and the Japanese in general, smaller families across the board has become a choice based for the most part on sound economics.
The less educated tend to have the larger families. They are not necessarily the less intelligent. They also tend to be the more religious and the less willing to accept the damage they do to the environment by having large families.
You have a very good point, some which may be extreme. You make it very easy for those who don't have an opinion on this issue find which side they prefer. Regarding the factual information being available, and your opinion not being included, two thumbs up.
Rod Marsden— When you force limits on family size, do you mean limits on all families? Or do you propose that the most successful, intelligent people be encouraged to procreate while the dunciles are prohibited? Just curious. :D
itakins— I am a huge proponent of big families, my dear! I think I told you that in the distant past. I think it a death knell that people of European descent no longer have children. And the downtrodden are just as valuable as anybody else. Hell, I am among them!
Allan McGregor— How good it is to hear from you, my erudite and witty friend. You make a great point about border walls or fences.
I always love your keen comments. You brought a ton of truth here:
"I detest racism, and anything to do with judging a man's worth by how much melanin his skin cells produce. But the 'racist card' is the cheapest hand in the pack for those who wish to stifle debate on what is really going on."
You are surely astute in your observation that certain countries, Mexico for instance, export their poor people to America. Sure, by sending fifty million of them here, they greatly lessen their own problems there.
I like what you wrote about travelers, too, and the perceptions of people based on tourists. Well said!
You also closed strong. It is the fault of politicians who use these poor immigrants and illegal aliens to impose their agenda on America, while crying crocodile tears over their impoverishment. Thank you for sharing your wisdom with us.
Hey! itakins! Finite planet. It isn't going to get any bigger to accommodate larger and larger human populations. The Chinese know this. The Japanese know this. Many people living in Europe and the USA are also aware of this.
Look at what is happening to the rain forests of our world. Fish species in our oceans and seas that were once quite common and plentiful are facing extinction from over fishing.
It may come to forcing limits on family sizes. It is my hope though that with education people will choose to have smaller families. In the meantime I don't see the need to promote large families our planet cannot afford.
The Chinese may force the issue of small families but the Japanese don't. In Japan it is an accepted thing to have small families. In many countries where education and good planning are considered essential to success in life small families are simply the way to go.
Allan McGregor makes some good points.
James I'm going to bow out here-you are missing my point.I do not suggest that govt care comes ahead of family,community ,society as you infer.
Comments like that of Mr Marsden make me feel ill-not because I have a large family -for which I make no apology!!But because it shows extreme ignorance on his part and again shows no sense of value for the human person.
Shame on him......!
Forcing Limits on family sizes !-How screwed up are these
people!
Oh I forgot -THE DOWNTRODDEN are not people of any value ....we can't be having that sort polluting our lovely planet(must be their gas guzzlers ).
Rod Marsden— You make excellent points in your comments, kind sir. I might add that along the same lines there is the concept that the most intelligent, successful among all people tend to have the fewest children. And intelligent, successful people tend to produce more of the same. Of course, there are exceptions both ways.
The Social Darwinists, the Eugenics crowd, had mathematical models that showed if the downtrodden have an average IQ of 75 and they have seven children for each couple; and if the elite of the world have IQs up around 125 average and they only have an average of one child; surely the world will eventually be swamped by the downtrodden.
Marquis— Thank you! Thank you very much. :D
itakins— I am not trying to be obtuse.
Freedom means to have the free will to affect one's own destiny. These other "freedoms" you mention, e.g., "freedom from fear ,freedom to be educated,freedom to have access to adequate housing and sanitation" were never heard of until Franklin Delano Roosevelt said them in the 1930s.
There is nothing in the American Constitution that says they federal government should provide education, food, or housing to people. That was traditionally the job of local communities.
If I take my neighbor a sack with $100 worth of groceries in it, he gets $100 worth of food. And it is a social interaction that is priceless. If Washington DC confiscates $100 from me, they'll send my neighbor maybe $50 worth of food. He gets half the food, and from a cold bureaucracy.
The larger problem is my neighbor doesn't have to worry about me oppressing him. If the government is the source of food, shelter, electricity, health care, clothes, et al., then that government has you as a dependent; you are at their mercy; and eventually, as history shows, your politics will effect your benefits, sooner or later.
I do very much appreciate your passion on these issues, and your big heart for the downtrodden.
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have"
President Gerald R. Ford
"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases"
Thomas Jefferson
Hxprof— I appreciate the concurrence, my friend. The Rule of Law is what distinguishes a civilized society, and a free people. Your comments are excellent and well received.
sord87— You are welcome! It is good to hear from you. I appreciate your thoughtul comments. I found this on line about your country:
"Malaysia hosts a population of refugees and asylum seekers numbering approximately 155,700. Of this population, approximately 70,500 refugees and asylum seekers are from the Philippines, 69,700 from Burma, and 21,800 from Indonesia.[135] The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants named Malaysia as one of the Ten Worst Places for Refugees on account of the country's discriminatory practices toward refugees. Malaysian officials are reported to have turned deportees directly over to human smugglers in 2007, and Malaysia employs RELA, a volunteer militia, to enforce its immigration law."
Just imagine this problem times 100!!
Never mind the alligators, James. Just fill the trench around the US with the worms from can you have opened.
I am seldom surpised at the arguments presented by liberals, who complain when it is suggested that any barrier (literal, legal or metaphorical) be erected to control immigration and then compare this with the Berlin Wall. No. Communist East Germany shot and murdered anyone trying to LEAVE their Socialist Utopia, not those clammering to get IN.
I detest racism, and anything to do with judging a man's worth by how much melanin his skin cells produce. But the 'racist card' is the cheapest hand in the pack for those who wish to stifle debate on what is really going on.
I remember as a child questioning many of my fellow Scots' assumption that All Americans are 'rich Americans'. The error arises from the experience of personal exposure, because for Scots who had never travelled to America, their only experience of Americans was of tourists who could afford the fare to come here.
Likewise, many Third World citizens imagine that Britain is a land replete with wealthy people. This is because they only ever meet Britons who had the fare to travel to their country.
On the whole neither Britain nor America export their poor, but many Third World countries do. And that's the problem. Neither Britain nor America are actually that short of poor people, who live on the streets and eat out of bins, that we need to import more from abroad.
What we should actually be doing is encouraging Third World nations to up their own game and provide better conditions for their own people rather than discarding their excess poverty on us. That only dilutes the wealth here and denudes the population elswhere.
For example, many Filipino doctors retrain as nurses in order to work in Britain where nurses are paid more than doctors are in the Philippines.
At the illegal level, myriads of bogus asylum seekers crowd into Britain annually, who had to travel here via liberal Western democracies like France, Germany, Italy, and Denmark. If they were really fleeing persecution, why not stop at the first 'friendly nation'? Because Britain has a generous system of handouts, free housing and healthcare.
Economic migrants are not stupid, nor are most of them interested in what they can do for our country, but in what our country can do for them. That's human nature and problem does not lie with those with the savvy to screw the system, but with the politicians who are willing to provide the sysytem for them to screw, for their own personal enrichment and the fulfilment of their personal political agenda.
James, I am a Malthusian when you get right down to it or at any rate I see a lot of sense in the theory.
As for 'carry the can' Chasuk I merely mean why should the people who realize that having small numbers of offspring (two or three)be burdened with those people who still have large numbers of offspring and may never understand or get 'it' that they are doing a great deal of damage to our planet and to others by doing so? Obviously they are also doing harm to themselves. Even so, why should those people doing the right thing for the environment and for others have to put up with those continually doing the wrong thing? Should those doing the wrong thing be invited into a country where the majority of the people are doing the right thing? Probably not. Hence the need for national boundaries until certain people get with the program of saving our beautiful planet from overpopulation of humans.
This article was outstanding.
Boy James -are you being deliberately obtuse ?All democratically elected governments have a duty of care to its citizens!-secondary to that they can make a moral choice as to whether they exercise charity to those who are not citizens-(eg foreign aid).Duty of care takes precedence over charity .
Duty of care-freedom?-freedom of speech,freedom to vote ,freedom from fear ,freedom to be educated,freedom to have access to adequate housing and sanitation.. on and
on.......freedom ,liberty and rule of law cover all aspects of human rights- -the govt has a duty of care to 'CARE'....YOU CONFUSE THAT WITH CHARITY.
Might I add finally-I abhor what is happening in the west right now-I dread the possible eventuality of totalitarianism and its evil ways.I read ,hear and see what's happening on a daily basis.With regard to all of that I am very much on the same page -believe it or not!
As I have said before...........don't blame the innocent pawns who are being manipulated by OUR goverments.
James-and yes, the Constitution doesn't give our government any responsibility for more than, "freedom and liberty and the rule of law". Sadly, many label Americans who desire the rule of law to be insensitive, cruel and uncaring.
iowac— Thank you very much for reading my article and offering your sound advice. I agree with you. :)
itakins— From whence in our Constitution do you see a governmental duty to "care" for people, as in to provide for their needs beyond freedom and liberty and the rule of law?
James A Watkins Hub Author 2 months ago
francis5k-- Thank you!! Thank you very much! :D