"Comprehensive Immigration Reform" What are we reallytalking about?

[Lurker66]

When politicians say comprehensive, what they actually mean is amnesty today for the promise of border security at some unspecified point in the future.

For me this should be the plan.

1. Secure the border. This means a fence and whatever it takes to secure that fence.

2. Crack down on employers who employ illegals. Crack down on those who rent to illegals. And no federal funds to sanctuary cities and states.

3. No more anchor babies. It isn't a law and it isn't in the constitution.

4. Amnesty (as in no prosecution) for those who turn themselves into authorities. Just a free ride to the border.

No more steps until the first three are accomplished.

5. A better guest worker program based on our needs.

6. A path to citizenship based on our needs.

Those wanting to apply must do so in person at stations set up at the border. Those who don't self deport within the first year won't be eligible for either program. That's my version of comprehensive immigration reform.

I could support most of this. If its negotiable or tweekable, we aint far apart. If its a line in the sand, someone will have to bend or we force someone to Rule with a pen and bypass political process.

 

[Lurker66]

Step one: get rid of our archaic income tax system and replace it with a consumption based system. Use the Retail Sales Tax concept, Fair Tax (a modified Retail Sales Tax), or a VAT. Eliminate the economic advantage that illegal workers have and at the same time defuse a lot of the hateful "they took our jobs" rhetoric.

Never would I support this. The upper income earners dont consume at the same rate as the poor and middle classes.

 

[Lurker66]

Good point. Folks throw around "comprehensive" and "reasonable" in a lot of political discussion. Mostly to confuse people and paint opponents into a corner.

If we aren't willing to shut down the border and enforce existing immigration/employment laws then there is no point discussing anything else. I'm not drop-dead opposed to amnesty, and I don't think everyone should be put on a bus/plane/train and be shipped home, but I don't want to hear a thing about it until the border is locked down and strict employment enforcement is put into place.

This too.^^^^^^^^

 

[D42]

It is this: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/18585-after-america-comes-north-america-gen-petraeus-boasts

Good info here: [url]http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/vk2k.shtml
[/URL]

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalization48.htm

 

[n2sooners]

I could support most of this. If its negotiable or tweekable, we aint far apart. If its a line in the sand, someone will have to bend or we force someone to Rule with a pen and bypass political process.

The only hard line would be security first. Not only does the rest not really work well without it, but it may never happen unless it is forced to be first. Other than that, I could go with just about anything that mostly followed that basic outline.

 

[tRidiot]

Never would I support this. The upper income earners dont consume at the same rate as the poor and middle classes.

Huh????

 

[Lurker66]

The only hard line would be security first. Not only does the rest not really work well without it, but it may never happen unless it is forced to be first. Other than that, I could go with just about anything that mostly followed that basic outline.

Step 4. Not that its a total sticking point, but I could live with "turning themselves in", get documented, get a visa and get on track to citizenship. Esp if any kids were born here. If the cant do that in a timely manner, bus n home n prosecute. Kids would have citizenship after 18.

 

[Lurker66]

Huh????

Look at percentage if income used to consume.....very disproportionate with regards to income. Its very easy to build a shell company and own nothing. The company consumes everything.

Rich people do that alot. Here in Oklahoma, its land and cattle companies.

Poor people and lower middle income cannot do that. Yet the poor and middle classes make upnthe bulk of who consumes. Consumer tax just shifts the tax burden to lower n middle class america. Further taxing those who cannot afford it.

 

[D42]

This is where it is going: http://www.activistpost.com/2014/07/the-agenda-behind-refugee-crisis-on.html

 

[TerryMiller]

Look at percentage if income used to consume.....very disproportionate with regards to income. Its very easy to build a shell company and own nothing. The company consumes everything.

Rich people do that alot. Here in Oklahoma, its land and cattle companies.

Poor people and lower middle income cannot do that. Yet the poor and middle classes make upnthe bulk of who consumes. Consumer tax just shifts the tax burden to lower n middle class america. Further taxing those who cannot afford it.

OK, Lurker. You're going to have to explain more about the land and cattle companies. I've got an agricultural and agribusiness background and I can guarantee you that they are "consuming" a lot of fertilizer and fuel to work the land and feed the cattle by purchasing hay and other products. There isn't much that I've seen where a cow critter is just turned out on some land and subsist completely on the vegetation. Oh, and cattle also need veterinary services and products.