Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
WHAT? The MEDIA misrepresenting the facts? The MEDIA saying America is a big bad horrible place? It can't be true! The disservice most media outlets do the US is appalling. You ought to forward a story of your own to the media outlets that misrepresented things to set them straight. How would a story about a successful Serbian immigrant living the dream in America play in European newspapers and TV?
You missunderstud me.
I was talking about Serbia being smashed by the media in the 1990's and not US in Europian media.
I think its funny watching the news. Pro-illegal immigration advocates always say the word immigrant never illegal. Further putting down US laws and sovereignty.
If they come here illegally they are probably up to no good which is why they did not come here legally in the first place.
If they really want to come here and work honestly, why not do it the legal way.
Most likely because coming here legally isn't that easy. There are very specific criteria that you have to meet such as having a spouse who is US citizen or if you're a highly skilled worker.
I think it needs to be reasonable to be enforced. There is no way to immigrate to the US from some countries unless your employer transfers you or you have family already in the US. I don't like the family-based immigration system.
The reforms I think are needed:
1. The borders must be sealed and it should be next to impossible to cross without inspection.
2. Legal immigration quotas need to be raised (say to 0.5% of the total population per year), they need to be tied to employment (you must hold down a job, pay taxes, and keep your family above the poverty level to get/keep a visa), and the quota should decrease as unemployment levels increase. Background checks and drug tests would also be required. One head of household can sponsor their IR's (Immediate relatives; spouse, and children under the age of 21) but no one else. No parents, brothers, or sisters. Allowing some immigration and sealing the border would force most potential border-crossers into line to be documented and immigrate legally.
3. Illegal immigrants already in the country and gainfully employed should be able to apply for a visa leading to an eventual green card. They should have to pay a fine and back taxes. Just like the regular visas, they'll have to prove the ability to hold a job, pay taxes, and keep their family above the poverty level, plus the background checks and drug tests. This would allow them to organize and demand at least the minimum wage and benefits, making them no cheaper for businesses to hire than US Citizens.
4. Extended family immigration (brothers and sisters of citizens/residents) should be abolished. If you want your extended family to join you, find them a job and have them apply for the work-based visas.
5. Anyone without a visa should be deported. Since it would now possible to get one outside or inside the country if you have a clean criminal record and can hold down a job, the remainder would be the criminals and social leeches. The visa/immigration reform/amnesty program would screen out millions of working families who are contributing to society and make it much easier for ICE to go after the real bad guys.
I'm pretty sure someone will disagree with my suggestions, but rather than make generalizations, could you address the specifics and point out the negative impacts of them? I have yet to hear any real reasonable arguments against this plan.
You forgot to say they need to get in the BACK of the line.
A single vote by a San Francisco Board of Supervisors member whose grandfather emigrated from China seven decades ago has halted in its tracks a proposal to condemn as "hate speech" radio personality Michael Savage's criticism of illegal aliens in the United States.
The vote tonight was 9-1, with third generation San Franciscan Ed Jew turning in the veto vote, after getting up and affirming Savage's First Amendment right to express his opinion.
Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval had introduced a resolution condemning the radio talker. After the vote, he called for the tally to be rescinded and the proposal sent to committee, which essentially is a polite way of letting the issue die.
"For the record, I do not agree with comments allegedly made by Mr. Savage, but the First Amendment gives him the right to make those comments," Jew said.
(Story continues below)
Well, we don't have to worry about Ed Jew anymore. He's serving 5 years in prison for extortion!!! MIchael Savage is a local talk show host who went national and then was booted back to the Bay Area. He says what most intelligent people are thinking, which is way bad in the politically correct climate from whence he comes.
Ed Jew sentenced to more than 5 years in jail | San Francisco Examiner (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Ed-Jew-sentenced-42422372.html - broken link)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
