The New Ipswitch illegals make NYT, Drudge

[BarryD]

Just saw a NY Times article on Drudge about the Sheriff and that hearing going on.

What do you guys think about this? Especially those of you living up there.

I think it's a great idea. If the gov't won't do anything about it, then don't bind local law enforcement's hands too. While they won't go to jail if they get arrested, much less deported, the chance of being fined up to $1000 each time might dissuade them from hanging around. That's also less money they have to send back home to Vincente Fox. Make them uncomfortable so they'll move on, or here's an idea, deport them and seal the borders.

I hate to tell you this, but regardless of who wins the next elections, we're already screwed. This country has gone straight downhill in the past couple of years. It'll be a wonder how the future historians will look at this specific period of time. Nothing gets done in Congress, terrorists run amok, a Republican president spends like a Dem and panders to Hispanics and THEIR president, V. Fox. There are as many news stories about Brad Pitt goijng to the hospital with flu-like symptoms as there are with Theo Van Gogh's Islamic killer, more people are concerned with what awesome new reality series starts this fall than the fact that the gov't wants all public school children to have mandatory psych evals. Are there any bright spots? Europe and the rest of the world hate us and want us to weaken. Amazingly, that's the Dems' and crazy Liberals' goals too. Everything's so fucking PC the BBC won't call terrorists.. terrorists, but bombers because they don't won't to pre-judge! This after having 50+ of your countryman blown to bits just trying to get to their shitty jobs! FUCK THAT!! Get ready friends, things are about to happen.

The BarryD

[Moononite11]

I support their rights to come here.  I don't think the state should have any power to stop people from moving in and out of the country any more than it should be able to stop people from moving through the country. The only ethically justifiable use of the state is for common defense of liberty, body and property.  The police, as agents of the state, should not be able to stop people from driving on public roads and bring them to prosecution for "criminal trespassing".

The central ethical arguments for keeping out immigrants, and prosecuting those that are in the country are utilitarian.  The arguments tend to focus on the ability of the local welfare system or of the local labor market to absorb immigrants.  I'm not a utilitarian, and so utilitarian arguments don't hold much water for me anyway.  Whether or not illegal immigrants unjustly eat up a great deal of welfare resources seems like a red herring from my perspective.  All of the welfare resources of the state are aquired unjustly, so all of the state's welfare capabilities should go.  Once you get rid of welfare, a central set of utilitarian arguments against illegal immigration lose their foundation.  Concerning the labor market arguments against immigration--they seem welfarist in their nature and contrary to libertarianism.   Effectively, they say the state should use its monopoly on violence to get into the business of intervening in the labor market.  I say, "All freedom to the labor markets."   If a surplus of labor appears in the US because of illegal immigration, then there will be a surplus for some clever capitalist to use to her advantage.  If workers native to the US have trouble competing with illegal immigrants, they will just have to train harder and make their labor more valuable.

With that said, this isn't a state that gives away large amounts of welfare, so immigrants are not coming for that.   In New Hampshire we see illegal immigrants who want to work.  Why would we want to use the force of the state to deny them the chance?

[Kat Kanning]

I agree.

[BarryD]

It's not about some good-hearted Mexicans coming here to do honest work. It's about the security of the country when people are coming in illegally, whether they're Mexicans or Norwegians, can just thumb their noses at authority because they know gov't agencies won't do anything.

These illegals send BILLIONS every year back to Mexico to support their families and, in turn, the Mexican gov't. That's why Fox doesn't give a damn. Bush is pandering to Hispanics, that's why he doesn't give a damn. If you don't see a problem with the borders for security issues in this day and age, that worries me.

The comment about once you get rid of welfare, the central arguments against illegal immgration are moot, is pure effing fantasy. So that's not even an issue. Welfare is here to stay kiddies. So let's not talk crazy. As long as they're are Dems in this country, Republicans pandering to Hispanics and the MSM is still kicking, there will be welfare. Of course, some (maybe most) illegals are here to do honest work. Unfortunately, that's besides the point. Most of them feed off the system and send the majoirty of their earnings back home. 

If you say it's okie-dokie for them to come and work, you open a whole can of worms. I would assume the next argument would be that it's okay if they had voting privileges too. What exactly are the benefits of illegal immgration anyway? Don't tell me it keeps low or reduces the price of goods. Employers here aren't hiring these folks for the good of America so they reduce prices. They hire them because they're cheap and it cuts their costs, so they make more profit. They don't have to give them benefits, further cutting costs. So when they're sick they get to go to hospitals and clinics for free medical care. That's nice. Where do I sign up?

I just see a lot more negatives of illegal immigration than you do, Moononite.   

[Michael Fisher]

If you say it's okie-dokie for them to come and work, you open a whole can of worms. I would assume the next argument would be that it's okay if they had voting privileges too.

I don't care if they come in and vote.  I don't think the entire system should exist anyways, so what difference does it make?

They don't have to give them benefits, further cutting costs. So when they're sick they get to go to hospitals and clinics for free medical care.

Blame medical laws for that, not immigrants.

Hospitals and clinics are not allowed to refuse treatment AND they're required by law to use the most expensive treatments available.      

[BarryD]

Mike,

You don't think there should be a voting system? Surely, I missread your statement. You don't care if illegals are able to vote? Being a citizen of this country with a Constitution and Bill of Rights with voting privledges being of supreme importance must not mean anything then. Am I on the right board or have I wandered into DailyKos or some other wacko give-away-this-country-at-all-costs site?

I blame the medical laws too. But to say don't blame the immigrants in this regard is like saying "Don't blame the killer, blame the gun manufacturer. The poor killer couldn't help but use the gun your honor, it was loaded and laying on the sidewalk. So he had to use it. I mean, c'mon."

We do still believe in personal responsibility on these boards, don't we?

[Dreepa]

We do still believe in personal responsibility on these boards, don't we?

I won't say we-- but yes I do!