Immigration

[Nuke]

I do believe in immigration. I think any person should be allowed to try for a new life in another country if they wish, unless they have a proven legitimate criminal record. Illegal Immigrants, a much tougher topic. Some illegal immigrants are trying to escape an oppressive country where they have no means of getting legitimate immigration papers. Other's can't afford the fee's attached to such application's for immigration. I think it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.

I think that the United States in particular should be more flexible in granting asylum. It's only granted in about twenty percent of cases.

We also need to make sure that the few people who we shouldn't give asylum to don't get in. These drug cartels are also harming the country. We should cut all these illegal programs the government runs and use some money to help the Mexicans with those.

 

[Deleted member 1609]

These drug cartels are also harming the country.

My answer to that would be to legalize all drugs. The cartels would be out of business.

 

[alfred01]

I do believe in immigration. I think any person should be allowed to try for a new life in another country if they wish, unless they have a proven legitimate criminal record. Illegal Immigrants, a much tougher topic. Some illegal immigrants are trying to escape an oppressive country where they have no means of getting legitimate immigration papers. Other's can't afford the fee's attached to such application's for immigration. I think it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.

I think that the United States in particular should be more flexible in granting asylum. It's only granted in about twenty percent of cases.

We also need to make sure that the few people who we shouldn't give asylum to don't get in. These drug cartels are also harming the country. We should cut all these illegal programs the government runs and use some money to help the Mexicans with those.

Agreed all around. So it's time all these overpaid politicians to get up off their butt and come up with a system that reflects the times. I know it's easy for me to sit here and say that but I'm not one of the many who are getting paid too!<br /><br />-- 30 Sep 2011, 13:35 --<br /><br />

These drug cartels are also harming the country.

My answer to that would be to legalize all drugs. The cartels would be out of business.

Agreed again Snobo, legalizing drugs is a win-win situation. Make a major dent in street crime, the government makes a ton of money and it signals the beginning of the end for these huge drug cartels.

 

[P8I.com]

I was using a hyperbole for religion if you didn't realize. The lack of religion/shinto is a factor in how people emigrate. Do you think a whole bunch of strong Christians or Muslims will emigrate into an atheistic stronghold? Probably not. Form of government is important as that is what determines one's legal rights. Location is vital as that can be a form of trade restriction, job restriction, association of companies, communications, effects of globalisation and so on. Natural disasters are vital as well; it's recent natural disaster will surely affect the minds of people emigrating into Japan. Japan has consistent natural disaster unlike USA on a significant scale. You can't logically deny all of that.

Then you say "Japan is not alone in this department" blindly when I've already stated: "These factors affect which countries you can compare with, and the more distant they are, the hard it is to fairly compare them."

You seriously need to read the whole post before replying; you seem to attach yourself on maybe one or two sentences without reading the whole post and making an illogical argument from that.

You were not being hyperbolic. You listed erroneous factors (e.g. Japan supposedly having a main religion) to explain Japan's strict immigration policies. You switched gears once I pointed that out and tried to argue that Japan being devoid of a main religion is, in and of itself, a deterrent. That's moronic. Most religious people looking to relocate are concerned with religious freedom, not on whether their new country is just as theocratic as the place they moved away from. And it isn't a matter of whether people want to immigrate there, it's about whether Japan makes it feasible and/or inviting to do so on a broad scale. So pretty much everything you babbled on about in relation to trade, jobs, companies, etc. is irrelevant.

My examples do fit, actually. Those aforementioned countries exercise their rights to restrict the flow of traffic into their country, and their laws are much stricter than our own, as previously stated.

-- 10 Oct 2013, 01:55 --

The leaders of Germany, the UK, and France have all come out and in so many words said that "multiculturalism has failed." Again, not my words, theirs. Europe has a serious problem with religious fanatics and extremists, and that's largely due to their immigration policy, and the fact that they allow new immigrants to segregate themselves from the rest of society.

Are you trying to tell me that the USA doesn't have a problem with religious fanatics and extremists? Try travelling to Alabama, Mississippi, or Oklahoma and see if you still have that opinion. Of course, no American sees radical Christians as "religious extremists." Also, the UK, France, and Germany have very few immigrants, so their leaders are idiots for saying that (although they would still be idiots even if there were tons of immigrants). France is controlled by a Christian democratic party, the UK is controlled by the Tories, and Germany is also controlled by a Christian Democratic party. Of course conservatives (especially Christian "democrats") are going to say that "multiculturalism has failed." You're being very selective with your evidence. Of course, none of those European parties are as conservative as the Republicans.

I've visited two of the three states you named (Mississippi and Alabama) on multiple occassions and plenty more within the region. No, there are no rampant extremists roaming the streets looking for someone's head to decapitate. You know, kind of how the British soldier was killed in broad daylight by one such Islamic terrorist? The question wasn't whether these extremists/fanatics exist here as well, it's whether they commit acts of terror at the same frequency and scale (amount of fatalities) as Islamic groups. They are not 'idiots' and their immigrant population is actually quite robust, particularly the United Kingdom. Let's do a test: You visit the Bible Belt and burn a Bible out in the open. Then, visit an Islamist nation and burn a Quran out in the open. And remember to do it in that order or else you won't be able to perform both, if you know what I mean.

 

[Shawn Gossman]

Immigration comes up a lot in the news and in debate. There are two main questions I have for you...

Is immigration fundamentally a good idea? If people arrive in the country legally, is it beneficial and is it right?

What should we do with illegal immigrants?

I think people should have the right to come here (US) and work as long as they are processed and legal. I have a degree in Homeland Security/Emergency Management/Intelligence studies. The one thing I fear the most about our border, is that terrorists are easily getting over it and forming cells in the nation. Once an attack happens and we find out they got here through the unprotected border, its going to be a BIG MESS!

 

[USAPoliticsForumCom]

Immigration comes up a lot in the news and in debate. There are two main questions I have for you...

Is immigration fundamentally a good idea? If people arrive in the country legally, is it beneficial and is it right?

What should we do with illegal immigrants?

Immigration is a good idea. Illegal immigration should not be tolerated. We should be able to pick and choose who we allow to be a citizen of our country. If they will benefit us in some way, let them in. If they'll be a drain on the system. Keep them out.