VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:46:37 11/28/07 Wed
Author: Paul Baker
Subject: Re: Educate yourself Pinocchio with Facts...
In reply to: Rich 's message, "Re: Educate yourself Pinocchio with Facts..." on 15:59:38 11/28/07 Wed

You are a lie... I think you're Crazy Jim.

>I asked you before to point out any lies that I've
>posted. You have not been able to do so. Reputable
>sources my ass.....
>
>
>>Actually they reference reputable sources unlike the
>>crap you spit out. :p
>>
>>
>>>Since when is a blog entry from some stupid liberal
>>>douche bag fact?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>PHL 126, Dr. Hauser, Fall 2003
>>>>>
>>>>>Bring ‘em On: Immigration Fallacies and Facts
>>>>>by Jennifer Cornacchione
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>For over 300 years, various ethnic, cultural, and
>>>>>social groups have come to this country to seek
>>>>>economic opportunity, reunite with family members,
>>>and
>>>>>find a place where they can be free from political
>>>and
>>>>>religious persecution. I suspect a majority of
>>>>>American-born citizens believe that immigration is
>a
>>>>>bad thing in this country that is harmful. Those
>>>>>particular Americans believe that this country is
>>>>>being infested by foreigners who cannot even speak
>>>our
>>>>>own language. However, if one were to look at the
>>>>>truth behind these fallacies, he/she would see that
>>>>>immigration is beneficial to our country and should
>>>>>not be abandoned. Instead, it should be increased.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Approximately 800,000 immigrants enter the United
>>>>>States each year. Of this number, 480,000 of them
>>>are
>>>>>family sponsored, meaning that they are immediate
>>>>>relatives to American citizens, such as a spouse,
>>>>>child, or sibling. Employment-based immigrants
>>total
>>>>>140,000 each year. This means that they are,
>>>“skilled
>>>>>professionals with exceptional ability and other
>>>>>priority workers, immigrating to jobs for which the
>>>>>U.S. Department of Labor has certified that no
>>>>>qualified U.S. worker is available” (“Legal
>>>>>Immigration to the United States”).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Contrary to popular belief, only 1% of the
>>population
>>>>>constitutes illegal immigrants. People commonly
>>view
>>>>>these immigrants as “dirty Mexicans” crossing the
>>>>>border, when in fact, six out of the ten illegal
>>>>>immigrants enter the United States legally with a
>>>>>student, tourist, or business visa. Many become
>>>>>illegal when they stay in the United States after
>>>>>their visas have expired (“America is
>>Immigration”).
>>>>>Refusing immigrants into this country will not
>>>>>alleviate the problem of illegal immigration. If
>>>they
>>>>>are able to get in now, then how is a decrease in
>>>>>immigration going to stop them? Illegal
>immigration
>>>>>is simply a problem that will continually have to
>be
>>>>>dealt with. Although many Americans think of
>>>>>immigration as illegal border hopping, there are
>>>>>people who actually do come here legally to improve
>>>>>their lifestyle or to be reunited with loved ones.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Many people who disapprove of immigration base
>their
>>>>>opinions on arguments that are purely fictitious.
>>>One
>>>>>such argument against immigration is that
>immigrants
>>>>>take away American jobs and are a drain on the U.S.
>>>>>economy. However, the only competition with
>>>>>immigrants is the skilled immigrants versus the
>>>>>skilled natives, and the unskilled immigrants
>versus
>>>>>the unskilled natives. Therefore, the person with
>>>the
>>>>>most skills deserves the job. If that person is an
>>>>>immigrant, then so be it. Obviously stated, the
>>>>>person who works the hardest and has the most
>>>>>knowledge gets the reward. Immigrants only hurt
>>>those
>>>>>who are less qualified. Another problem that comes
>>>up
>>>>>when talking about immigrants taking away jobs is
>>>that
>>>>>immigrants will work for less, so they are hired
>>more
>>>>>often than are the natives who are seeking
>>>employment.
>>>>> Of course immigrants will work for a lower wage;
>>>they
>>>>>want to succeed in this country and in order to
>live
>>>a
>>>>>decent life, they need an income, and they best and
>>>>>most legal way to do such a thing is to work. If
>>>they
>>>>>cannot find employment elsewhere, they will settle
>>>for
>>>>>being paid lower wages. Instead of putting the
>>blame
>>>>>on immigrants, people should look to the cause of
>>the
>>>>>problem: the employers. It is not the immigrant’s
>>>>>fault that the employers are willing to pay them
>>less
>>>>>for their work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Furthermore, there is no “set number” of jobs
>>because
>>>>>as the demand for workers increases, the number of
>>>>>jobs will increase as well. As immigrants come
>into
>>>>>this country, they increase the demand for goods
>and
>>>>>services through consumption. This in turn
>>increases
>>>>>the number of workers needed to produce those goods
>>>>>and services. Immigration has also been accused of
>>>>>being the cause of wage inequality in the United
>>>>>States. Francisco L. Rivera-Batiz, an economist at
>>>>>Columbia University, states that, “Both theory and
>>>>>empirical evidence suggest that there has been very
>>>>>little, if any, impact of immigration on the wages
>>of
>>>>>high-school dropouts” (“Five Immigration Myths
>>>>>Explained”). After actually looking at the facts,
>>it
>>>>>is quite obvious that immigrants do not take away
>>>>>“American” jobs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Immigrants do succeed in this country. In fact,
>>over
>>>>>the past forty years, the percentage of both male
>>and
>>>>>female immigrant high school dropouts has decreased
>>>by
>>>>>thirty-three percent. The percentage of immigrant
>>>>>females who are college graduates has increased by
>>>>>twenty-three percent, while the percentage of
>>>>>immigrant male college graduates has grown by about
>>>>>twenty percent. Since 1990, both male and female
>>>>>immigrants have acquired a higher level of
>education
>>>>>compared to the education native men and women have
>>>>>received. Being a native of another country does
>>not
>>>>>automatically make one lazy and unsuccessful.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Moreover, immigrants tend to have high rates of
>>>>>entrepreneurship, which also leads to the creation
>>of
>>>>>new jobs. In fact, in 1995, Inc. Magazine reported
>>>>>that 12% of the 500 fastest growing corporations in
>>>>>America were companies started by immigrants (“Five
>>>>>Immigration Myths Explained”). If one were to take
>>a
>>>>>look at the engineers, doctors, and scientists in
>>>>>America, he/she would notice that perhaps the
>>>majority
>>>>>of them have come from foreign countries.
>>>>>Additionally, from the use of immigrants as
>>>employees,
>>>>>American firms benefit from the country the
>>immigrant
>>>>>came from. American businesses market their
>>products
>>>>>in the foreign market by creating a link between
>>>>>themselves and the immigrant’s country (Borjas
>96).
>>>>>Because Americans would increase their business
>>>>>overseas, their profits would increase.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Another component of the argument that immigrants
>>are
>>>>>harmful to the economy is that those coming from
>>>other
>>>>>countries do not pay taxes. On the contrary, all
>>who
>>>>>work in the United States are required to pay
>income
>>>>>taxes. Immigrants, specifically, paid over
>>>>>one-hundred billion dollars in direct taxes to
>>local,
>>>>>state, and federal governments in 1997.
>>Furthermore,
>>>>>the average annual tax payments made by immigrants
>>>are
>>>>>roughly the same as natives: $6,300 for immigrants
>>>>>opposed to $6,500 for natives. In fact, the
>>National
>>>>>Academy of Sciences states that, “Over the long run
>>>an
>>>>>additional immigrant and all descendants would
>>>>>actually save the taxpayers $80,000” (qtd. In “Five
>>>>>Immigration Myths Explained”). University of
>>>>>California, Berkeley economist Ronald Lee concluded
>>>>>that forty-nine out of the fifty states benefit
>>>>>fiscally from immigration. Supporting immigration,
>>>>>56% of economists believed that increased
>>immigration
>>>>>would have the most positive impact on the American
>>>>>standard of living, whereas 33% believed that the
>>>>>current immigration rate had the most favorable
>>>>>impact. Therefore, immigrants do not harm the
>>economy
>>>>>in general or when it comes to taxes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Another common myth about immigration is that
>>America
>>>>>is being overrun by foreigners. It is true that
>the
>>>>>number of immigrants living in the United States
>has
>>>>>grown since 1910; however, the percentage of the
>>>>>population they comprise has decreased from 14.7%
>to
>>>>>11%. Also, in 1913, during the peak of
>immigration,
>>>>>there were 13 immigrants per 1,000 U.S. residents,
>>>and
>>>>>currently there are three legal immigrants per
>1,000
>>>>>U.S.-born residents entering the United States. As
>>>>>one can see from this data, America is not being
>>>>>flooded by those coming from other countries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Immigrants contribute considerably to American
>>>>>society. According to a Manhattan Institute
>report,
>>>>>immigrants are more likely than natives to have an
>>>>>intact family, college degree, and also to be
>>>>>employed. Legal immigrants also attend school
>>longer
>>>>>than natives. The median years of schooling for
>>>>>immigrants is thirteen compared to twelve for
>>>>>American-born citizens, according to the New
>>>Immigrant
>>>>>Survey. In addition, from that same report, we
>>learn
>>>>>that immigrants are no more likely to commit crime.
>>>>>Yet another way immigrants contribute to American
>>>>>society, as explained earlier, is through their
>>>>>assistance in the growth of innovation.
>>Foreign-born
>>>>>scientists and engineers make up a significant
>>number
>>>>>of individuals with PhDs. Immigrants are also
>>>>>involved in defending our country. According to
>the
>>>>>U.S. Department of Defense, “More than 60,000 serve
>>>on
>>>>>active duty in the U.S. armed forces, make up five
>>>>>percent of all enlisted personnel on active duty in
>>>>>the U.S. armed forces, and nearly seven percent are
>>>>>enlisted in the U.S. Navy” (“Five Immigration Myths
>>>>>Explained”). Being born in another country does
>not
>>>>>mean that one is uninterested in and/or does not
>>>>>contribute to American society.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The current immigration policy of the United States
>>>>>rests on the assumption that it is the community’s
>>>>>right to decide on a person’s membership (Singer
>>>255).
>>>>> But who are we to tell those who are suffering or
>>>>>seeking a place to be free that they may not
>enter?
>>>>>As I explained earlier, many people believe that
>>>>>immigrants are a drain on the economy. The result
>>of
>>>>>their feelings would be that we do not need
>>>immigrants
>>>>>in this country. Many Americans do not know the
>>>facts
>>>>>about immigration, so why should they have any
>right
>>>>>to decide if immigrants should or should not enter
>>>the
>>>>>community/country? Chances are, with the obvious
>>>>>opinion of many, immigrants would be refused into
>>>this
>>>>>country. America is not short on resources, and
>can
>>>>>support many more people who want to live in this
>>>>>country, as our ancestors were able to do. While
>>>most
>>>>>of us are living in luxury in America, there are
>>many
>>>>>immigrants who just want to live in this country.
>>>>>Many people feel that we have enough problems in
>>this
>>>>>country and we cannot even care for our own
>>>>>inhabitants. However, we could. And we could
>>>support
>>>>>immigrants in this country, as well. The fact that
>>>we
>>>>>do not forgo our luxuries to help others suggests
>>>that
>>>>>we regard our luxuries as more important than the
>>>>>lives of immigrants (Rachels 76). The immigration
>>>>>policy should be based on the interests of those
>>>>>affected-- immigrants and natives. Equal
>>>>>consideration should be given to each party in the
>>>>>areas where their interests conflict. This would
>>>mean
>>>>>that more fundamental interests take priority over
>>>>>less fundamental interests (Singer 256). For
>>>example,
>>>>>a person wanting to live in the United States to
>>seek
>>>>>refuge would take precedence over a citizen who
>>wants
>>>>>to live in a multi-billion dollar home. One is a
>>>>>necessity, the other is not. If our resources are
>>>>>supposedly so scarce that we cannot allow
>>immigrants,
>>>>>then why is it okay to waste these resources on
>>>>>unnecessary materialistic goods? I agree with
>>Singer
>>>>>in that those with the most fundamental needs
>should
>>>>>be the ones whose wants are to be granted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Another theory that supports increased immigration
>>is
>>>>>Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative. This
>theory
>>>>>states that one should, "act only according to that
>>>>>maxim by which one can at the same time will that
>it
>>>>>should become a universal law" (Rachels 121). This
>>>>>means that if we close the doors to those seeking
>>>>>refuge, then the doors would be closed on us as
>well
>>>>>if we were ever in need of assistance. The
>>>>>Categorical Imperative also states that we, “should
>>>be
>>>>>helpful to people regardless of our particular
>wants
>>>>>and needs” (Rachels 121). If people are seeking
>>some
>>>>>sort of aid, we should help them. According to
>>Kant,
>>>>>we are obliged to allow immigration.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>This country was founded on the principles of
>>>equality
>>>>>and tolerance. Refusing immigrants into the United
>>>>>States would refute everything this country is
>based
>>>>>on. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled
>>>>>masses yearning to breathe free," is not rhetoric,
>>it
>>>>>is America's oath to ensure that those people who
>>>face
>>>>>the prospect of ethnic cleansing, religious
>>>>>oppression, torture, and even death have a place to
>>>>>live (“America is Immigration”). If we were
>allowed
>>>>>freedom from Great Britain and elsewhere, then why
>>>>>can’t others have freedom from where they have come
>>>>>from? No one should take precedence over another
>>>when
>>>>>it comes to deciding who should be able to live in
>>>>>this country. Everybody deserves to be free and to
>>>>>live life in the manner that they want to. I think
>>>>>most people forget that they are here as a result
>of
>>>>>immigration. We are all here for the same reasons:
>>>>>our families wanted to give themselves, and their
>>>>>future generations, a better life and greater
>>>>>opportunities. If it had not been for immigration,
>>>>>none of us would be in the position we are today.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>WORKS CITED
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>· “America is Immigration.”
>>>American
>>>>>Immigration Lawyer’s Association. Internet. 10
>>>>>November, 2003. .
>>>>>
>>>>>· Borjas, George J. Heaven’s Door:
>>>>>Immigration Policy and the American Economy.
>>>>>Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.
>>>>>
>>>>>· “Five Immigration Myths
>>>Explained.”
>>>>>American Immigration Lawyer’s Association.
>>>Internet.
>>>>>10 November, 2003. .
>>>>>
>>>>>· “Legal Immigration to the United
>>>>>States.” American Immigration Lawyer’s
>>Association.
>>>>>Internet. 10 November, 2003. .
>>>>>
>>>>>· Rachels, James. The Elements of
>>>>>Moral Philosophy. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill,
>>>>1999.
>>>>>
>>>>>· Singer, Peter. Practical
>Ethics.
>>>>>2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press,
>1999.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.