Your Views on Illegal Immigration

[kah13176]

Hello RPF. What are your views on illegal immigration?

Personally, I am a minarchist, meaning the only function of government is to provide legal recourse and protection from aggression, theft, etc. This would typically include a prison system as well.

As such, it is essential to know the criminal histories of those crossing our borders. For all we know, an Al-Qaeda operative is swimming the Rio, or someone whose committed 20 murders in Mexico is fleeing to America to avoid arrest. Furthermore, there are questions as to whether illegal immigrants evade taxes. Though most of us can agree on abolishing or greatly reducing most taxes, it is not fair that a legal citizen pays taxes that fund local projects, schools..., but an illegal immigrant does not while benefiting from the same services.

No matter what the left might paint me as, I am not xenophobic, nor am I against legal immigration. Perhaps the legal process should be streamlined, though I am not an expert on the process.

However, other libertarians identify as anarcho-capitalist and voluntaryist. These factions tend to support open borders, at least hypothetically within their perfect world. These groups see unhindered immigration as a natural right to assemble.

[akforme]

Neither, I'm for legal immigration, but my idea of legal immigration wouldn't cost 20K and take 20 years

[kah13176]

Neither, I'm for legal immigration, but my idea of legal immigration wouldn't cost 20K and take 20 years

Exactly. I'm not too familiar with the current legal process, but I conceded that it might need to be streamlined.

[mtj458]

I'll probably answer more in depth tomorrow but as a supporter of free trade, I support the free trade of labor. I do not value the lives of foreigners more than the lives of Americans, and I disagree that Americans will be much worse of as a result of massive immigration.

[kah13176]

I'll probably answer more in depth tomorrow but as a supporter of free trade, I support the free trade of labor. I do not value the lives of foreigners more than the lives of Americans, and I disagree that Americans will be much worse of as a result of massive immigration.

Something to consider is the effect of an explosion of supply in the labor market. I'm not too familiar with this, but remember that from roughly 1760-1820, during England's Industrial Revolution, their population doubled. As a result, they experienced huge wage cuts and massive unemployment. I'm not too familiar with the impacts immigration has on economies, so I'd like to hear how fellow libertarians would respond to this.

[t0rnado]

I'm for the government selling all of the property it has on the border to private owners. The private property owners can decide if they want Mexicans or Canadians trespassing on their land or not.

[mrsat_98]

Getting the illegal immigrant out of the whitehouse would be a good start.

[lynnf]

Getting the illegal immigrant out of the whitehouse would be a good start.

I'm for that!

lynn

[Sentient Void]

Prohibition doesn't work and is immoral with voluntary consenting activities. It doesn't matter whether we're talking about drug prohibition, alcohol prohibition, prostitution, gambling, or immigration. As we can see, with all of these things - these demands get met *regardless*, but these activities merely get driven underground into a black market where quality is reduced significantly and they become surrounded with violent crime.

More skilled and unskilled labor in the country merely increases the wealth for *everyone* by allowing more labor to compete for more production.

For example, those illegal immigrants who work in construction, housecleaning, landscaping, farming, nanny(ing?), etc are simply meeting a demand and offering a lower price for their services than others would. This allows those companies and individuals who employ them to offer services at a lower price as these companies compete with eachother, thus creating mroe savigns for the consumers of these services, which then allow them to spend their now saved money on other things they really demand - creating a ripple effect of more production and wealth creation in other jobs that are in demand to increase our standard of living.

[akforme]

Exactly. I'm not too familiar with the current legal process, but I conceded that it might need to be streamlined.

If you don't have a registered skill that's needed, a million bucks to invest, or a family member already here, you are pretty much never going to be a legal citizen. And even if you are one of those things it's still 20K and 20 years to complete.

[Kludge]

Definitely against legal immigration. Illegal immigration causes the government to spend on ineffective policy & eliminates tax revenue they'd otherwise receive. At the same time, illegals may also use gov't services. Whether or not their greatly-reduced contributions to the overall US make up for whatever they use is up for debate, which is why I'm wishy-washy on whether or not I'm in favor of illegal immigration, though I'm definitely in favor of anti-immigration laws.

[Sentient Void]

The answer to any social or economic 'problem' is never more government, it's *always* more freedom.

Get government out of the situation, or minimize it as much as humanly possible. That means instead of clamoring to create more laws, regulations and increasing government authority and power, look t reduce it - such as minimizing or eliminating the welfare state, etc - don't look for more ways to justify it, expand it, or maintain it.

[hazek]

Poll: Are you for or against illegal immigration?

What an irrelevant question. Immigrants are just scapegoats for failed welfare policies. If we had a true free market, they would be welcomed and needed, legal or illegal.

[Kludge]

If we had a true free market, they would be welcomed and needed, legal or illegal.

Welcomed by some. The others would be angered and fearful of the threat their "culture" will be taken over.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

If you can:

1. Provide a definition of illegal.
2. Provide a definition of immigration.
3. Cite where a United States of America border is defined (ie. in the United States Code, Constitution, Treaty, etc.)
4. Cite where States delegated authority in the Constitution regulating immigration to the federal political subdivision.

If you are unable to do the above then my opinion is there is no such thing as illegal immigration. You made it up or you are the type of person who will believe any bullshit someone tells you is true.

[Sentient Void]

Welcomed by some. The others would be angered and fearful of the threat their "culture" will be taken over.

NOAnti-Federalist and other nationalists?

[erowe1]

Since I support missionaries who migrate to share the Gospel in countries where it's illegal to do so, I can't very well pretend I'm not for illegal immigration, so I voted "for."

[erowe1]

Illegal immigration causes the government to spend on ineffective policy & eliminates tax revenue they'd otherwise receive.

Making government less effective and eliminating tax revenue are both good things. Right?

[teacherone]

why do we keep debating the same topics ad nauseum?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hq5jZrFTbE

[Kludge]

Making government less effective and eliminating tax revenue are both good things. Right?

Yes.

[kah13176]

I addressed that immediately after. Normal citizens pay taxes that fund public schools and projects that people who don't pay taxes can take advantage of. Is that fair?

[muzzled dogg]

Open the borders

[Brian4Liberty]

why do we keep debating the same topics ad nauseum?


Because Dogmas like to bark? ;)

[Zippyjuan]

Unless they are paid in cash, illegal immigrants DO pay taxes. If they got a job using fake ID and Social Security numbers, they are paying those taxes. Social Security collects billions every year for "unrecognized" social security numbers- most of these probably belong to illegal aliens- who will never collect a penny in Social Security. Citizens paid in cash also avoid paying taxes so that is not related to immigration status. When they buy things, they are paying sales taxes. If they rent, they are paying somebody's (the property owner's) property taxes. The majority of immigrants do not receive government benefits (they are not elgible for federal programs like Social Security or Medicare anyways). Some states do offer benefits like education or state forms of welfare, but again the majority of illegals don't receive those- they want to avoid government contact and possible deportation. For this same reason, crime rates in cities with larger numbers of illegal immigrants are also lower than comparable cities. El Paso was recently named the "safest city" in the US based on crime rates. San Diego made the top five as well- right across the border from major Mexican cities (Ciudad Juarez and Tiajuana).

The vast majority of people coming here illegally are looking for work. As long as people believe they can find better opportunity in the US than where they come from, they will continue to come here- no matter how difficult the government tries to make it. In California they built a wall hundreds of miles long to try to stop people from coming across. Instead they have dug tunnels under it, cut holes, used boats to go around it or planes to fly over and even in one location built a ramp big enough to be able to drive a fully loaded semi over the top of it. Spending on border security has more than tripled since 9/11 and still people come. Thousands have died attempting to get here- and still they come.

Let us suppose you wan to get rid of every illegal alien in the country. How would you do that? Have the government set up road blocks on streets and highways to check people for their papers? Raid businseses to check the status of all their workers including you? Randomly stop people on the streets to check IDs? This would be a police state and not libertarian.

Sure, don't offer driver's licenses or education or welfare. I'm in favor of that. Those are policies set by the states- contact your state Governor or representatives about that. They won't have much of an impact on illegal immigration though.

The first post in the thread asks about the risk of Al Queada "swimming across the Rio Grande". It should be pointed out that the 9/11 hijackers all entered the US legally and all those arrested for terror actions or plots since then were also all here legally.

[Brian4Liberty]

Unless they are paid in cash, illegal immigrants DO pay taxes.

They might avoid Income Taxes by claiming many dependents and not filing annual tax returns.


they want to avoid government contact and possible deportation. For this same reason, crime rates in cities with larger numbers of illegal immigrants are also lower than comparable cities. El Paso was recently named the "safest city" in the US based on crime rates. San Diego made the top five as well- right across the border from major Mexican cities (Ciudad Juarez and Tiajuana).

And maybe they avoid reporting crimes. "Crime rate" is just a statistic...


Let us suppose you wan to get rid of every illegal alien in the country. How would you do that? Have the government set up road blocks on streets and highways to check people for their papers? Raid businseses to check the status of all their workers including you? Randomly stop people on the streets to check IDs? This would be a police state and not libertarian.

If the recent Arizona law is an accurate experiment, then self-deportation may play a big role.

[BlackTerrel]

Already been said but my answer is somewhere in between. I support legal immigration and oppose illegal immigration but I'd favor changing some of the laws around what is legal and illegal. But I have no issue with the US enforcing our borders. Any country in the world has a right to say who they want to allow to enter.

[kah13176]

Already been said but my answer is somewhere in between. I support legal immigration and oppose illegal immigration but I'd favor changing some of the laws around what is legal and illegal. But I have no issue with the US enforcing our borders. Any country in the world has a right to say who they want to allow to enter.

That's where I stand as well. I'm against illegal immigration less for tax enforcement and more for safeguarding our life, liberty, and property. You never know how many serial killers from other countries cross illegally.

[Andrew-Austin]

Its complicated, and I don't have passionate views on the matter.

I don't value North Americans more than I do South Americans, I don't care about imaginary lines on a map, and I don't value the government's arbitrary declarations. Our current system is very unlikable and dysfunctional, because immigration is subsidized through welfare, our schooling/daycare system, and public roads. In a free and private property society, the only way people could immigrate is by moving across privately owned roads and land, which they would do by paying a toll, and once they arrive at their destination they would have to survive on their own. Accordingly in a such a world immigration would be far less than it is today, and this would create less of a haphazard cultural melting-pot effect that we see today. But so long as we still live in a statist world, I don't think I favor any state enforcement of immigration-restriction laws, despite the fact that immigration is subsidized. I just favor the removal of subsidies, and upholding property rights. The state has no right to say who can enter 'the country', I don't think the 'the country' should be considered the state's property.

I did not vote in the poll because it seems silly to me, my above stance can not be characterized as being for or against "illegal immigration". When it comes to migration, I am neutral.

[PreDeadMan]

people crossing "borders" freely without any stupid government rules.... +1 for liberty.

[Brett85]

It would be best to bring our troops home from around the world and use them to secure our borders. Sending 100,000 troops to the U.S. Mexico border would stop illegal immigration over night. As far as the illegal immigrants who are already here, we should make them leave voluntarily by cutting off their welfare benefits and punishing employers who hire them.

[Brett85]

people crossing "borders" freely without any stupid government rules.... +1 for liberty.

And press +1 for dead Americans along the border.

[Kludge]

And press +1 for dead Americans along the border.

Wait.... Is this a trick?


+.....1?

[Brett85]

Wait.... Is this a trick?


+.....1?

Or perhaps it should be -1.

[emazur]

Paul has it right:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255968/who-ron-paul-interview?page=1
nro: We know what that means. Anyways, another change in direction: How do you square your hard line on immigration away with your libertarian philosophy?

PAUL: Well, I just think that it’s unsustainable without having some border protection, mainly because of the welfare state. The welfare state encourages our people not to work, and so then we need workers. And when immigrant workers come in, there are welfare benefits, education, and Medicare for those who come who are not legal. If there wasn’t that, I’d be pretty generous with illegal immigration.

I’m writing a book for next year, and I’m going to say I support neither amnesty for everyone nor guns and shooting people when they come over. I want immigration to be legal, but I would argue that there should be no federal mandates to provide services for illegal immigrants. Maybe immigrants would go back, then, to their families, on their own. I think it’s virtually impossible to send back 12 million people, but I don’t think we should give them citizenship. So the Left will be unhappy because they want immediate citizenship, and the Right will be unhappy because they want to send them all home. But the other day, we had that DREAM Act vote — a lot of things there I was sympathetic to. But they wanted to give them tremendous welfare benefits. I don’t like that kind of stuff.

[Southron]

I'm not in favor of anymore immigration, period.

The sad fact is many of these illegals are deluding themselves into thinking they are going to get rich here, when that is very unlikely.

[MelissaWV]

Opening the borders does not mean "dead Americans" all over the place if those living along the border are allowed to raise their own defenses. There are an awful lot of people who'd come to their aid, especially for the right price. There are an awful lot of people who'd contribute to such efforts. Of course, that leads into what's really wrong with just flinging the borders open.

If everything else remained precisely the same, opening the borders would speed along the demise of this country at an amazing rate. Welfare would swell ridiculously, almost like a Boomer bump. The healthcare system (and remember how it's structured as of ObamaCare) would see its own manner of crisis, though it could be framed as creating jobs, since so many more nurses and PA's and the like will be needed to meet demand. Schools? I don't think we could build schools fast enough to keep up with the influx, and since ESL classes would be a "must" at so many of them, it would be an extra demand on limited resources. With minimum wage still in place, and all of these border-crossers most likely given more consideration, you might see "rights" groups protesting the "under the table" payment some of these immigrants receive. Some of the poor bastards will even protest on the grounds that people working for $5/hour cash are not making as much as someone making $8/hour in a "legit" fashion. I would expect to see the Government take this route, too, in order to gather these folks into the fold as hard-working AND tax-paying.

My view on immigration is that if you fix all of the things mentioned in the last paragraph, I stop caring about illegals because I am no longer funding their activities. It assumes that things will stay close to being the same. I'd rather not have Federally-funded anything, but I'm assuming that there will be. If there are to be Federally-funded schools, then let them be for citizens and children of citizens. Citizenship can be very easily checked via birth certificate or citizenship papers. While these can be forged, it would do any organization a world of good to periodically audit the submissions to see if they have any fraud going on. Non-citizens can get together and make schools for themselves, in my opinion. Community schools can be great things. This would also put the ESL burden on them, which at young ages is actually not that bad. I learned the bulk of my English from television shows :p

Jobs can also verifiy citizenship in much the same way. If they don't, then it should be perfectly legal to point out that XYZ company uses non-citizen labor. LMNOP company can then, similarly, advertise that they use only citizen labor. A Consumer Reports / Good Housekeeping type seal could audit and approve companies who want to say they use citizen labor. Consumers would decide if it matters to them one way or another.

Welfare should also be for citizens, if it is to continue to exist. Once again, it's very easy to verify. Local communities can band together and offer charity to non-citizens if they so desire. If the local community is going broke, you can rest assured the only charity they'll hand out is bus tickets. If the Government is going broke, they show no such wisdom.

Border towns, states, etc., should be able to raise funds for and mount defenses of their borders. More specifically, property owners should be able to do that (but I'm assuming the State will still own property for a long, long time).

There is the matter of criminals, but it seems obvious that you should be able to ship back criminals to be held in their home nation's jails. If they can't do a good job of it, then we can hold them, but send the home nation the bill. If they won't pay, then cut some trade ties. In any event, the cost of jailing real criminals is not that huge (how many illegals are in jail on drug-exclusive charges, though?).

If the immigrants can't live off the Government, interrupt the school system, run over your dog, etc., then what's left to object to?