Well this is a great a priori and undemocratic statement to justify a horrendous social situation. If you ever feel like backing it up with some reasons, feel free.

If you want to know an estimate of how many U.S. citizen children are affected by this, go to the Pew Hispanic Center report on “unauthorized migrants” “(which NOT the same as “undocumented immigrants”)

However, you make the jump from that very reasonable position to the idea that we’re responsible for that situation, its our responsibility to fix it, and we should do that by allowing anyone from anywhere to come here, work, and send back money to their home countries. That’s the position I reject.

Nik: “global hegemony”? “world’s only superpower”? “Washington consensus”? “Free trade”? To argue that global economic and political conditions are not a significant responsibility of rich countries (including, but not limited to the United States) is flawed, even if you conclude that the history of imperialims, the use of countries like India and Pakistan and El Salvador and Afghanistan and Chile as Cold War pawns, etc. has nothing to do with why billions of people are in poor countries and a few hundred million are in rich countries. Iraq is more a caricature of the rule than an exception to it.

Further, even if the former empires and global superpowers bore no economic, moral, or historical responsibility, it’s imo both more pragmatic AND more humane for people everyone (except for really really rich people) to build world migration policies that provide rights to labor.

Rights of citizens should have a higher priority. Part of tax money should be utilized in improving skills of local labor. Encouragement of immigrants without investing in betterment of local labor could lead to greater skewed job prospects for citizens. But to some extent, the american economy should be able to absorb undocumented immigrants without significant problems.

WTF?

Ok, seriously, what are you smoking, M. Nam?

Let’s tackle the “bilingual Army” bit first. Are you totally unfamiliar with the concept of the Fog of War? And you’re proposing to throw ANOTHER LANGUAGE INTO THE MIX? You think that would…what…make the US Army into a more effective fighting force? Look, genius, friendly fire still happens in this day and age, with all sorts of sophisticated IFF electronics and people WHO SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE. The Army is not a vehicle of naturalization, nor should it ever become one. We’re not Rome, for gosh sakes.

And you honestly think that the “rest” of American citizens wouldn’t look down on immigrants who served in the armed forces? If ever a situation was laid before me for insuring a group of people become disparaged and looked-down-on, you’ve done an outstanding job of outlining it right here.

Next up, rights are almost never “earned.” I find it fascinating that immigrants and their children often make this case most strongly, as if they’re incarcerated and should get some kind of special credit for “good behavior.” If I’ve done anything to earn being an American citizen, it’s what I’ve done with my life since being born. I did very little in the womb to secure this status. Maybe you had a more active pre-natal life than I did, but I still somehow doubt you earned diddly while floating around trying not to loop the umbilicus around your neck.

And naturalization most definitely should come at the taxpayer’s expense. Who else? Halliburton? I’m sure a great many companies, especially the metanationals, would be very happy to extend rights of citizenship to their employees.

Ha! Right.

First, a belated Happy Birthday. And um…since when did you join SM?! Not that I’m complaining. Glad to see you on Board my favorite SA blog-o-goodness.

And big ups to SAAVY, too.

Also, undocumented workers often do pay taxes.

A lot of great things have been mentioned on this thread. IÂ’d like to get a few thoughts on what might actually happen if borders, particularly with Mexico were more open.

The driving force behind modern economic theory is that resources will go to where they’re most useful. Labor, perhaps, should also be allowed to flow as freely as capital.

IÂ’m skeptical of the ‘mass migrationÂ’ fear because I think people have strong family ties and only the most desperate break them. It’s likely that a lot of people would opt to work for a few months at a time and send money home. At the very least, open borders would give people more and less-desperate options.

Migrant workers would go where they’re likely to be paid and treated well because they’re not tied to any particular area once they’ve already made the choice to leave their homes – if they were assured legal protection they would more easily be able to move to where the market sends them. Because these migrant workers would be have legal protection, employers would not have incentive to poach on them and might hire more Americans.

Also, by allowing would-be migrants to “vote with their feet,” the origin countries might find incentive to improve their physical and political infrastructure.

Both the sending and receiving governments benefit from the current system, more open borders and legal protections for workers might just breed greater transparency on both sides.

I think the brits still use gurkha as 2nd rate soldiers they pay them less, would’nt consider giving them educational/residential privelages. Thats just wrong

The children of illegals who were born here are citizens anyway. I am talking of children who came illegally a few years ago. They need to pay their debt before they can lay claims.

Jai:

“Cannon fodder” is a term used for runts who are forced to go into war without proper arms etc and without any chance of winning. These illegals will be armed to teeth by the strongest army in the world, and trained by the very best in fighting, communication, espionage etc. In addition, they will be paid. Doesn’t get any better than this.

Nik/ggk:

Thanks for backing me up.

But the whole debate centers around what is and what is not “necessary.”

That’s the problem with all so called social justice initiatives. Initially, they say immigration is necessary and hence a right. Then free education is necessary and a right. Then free healthcare. Then pensions. Then jobs. Then housing. Then braces. Then golf memberships.

It’s a slippery slope – all social justice programs end in the poorhouse.

HMNI: Just as the Irish did not have a right to protest against the Civil War and just as they did not have a right to decide whether slavery was right, South was wrong, North was correct etc, the same way illegals do not have a right of opinion whether Iraq war is correct or moving against Iran is wrong. That right exists solely with citizens, and they need to fight the war that the citizens tell them to, if they want to end up a citizen.

M. Nam