Report shows Obama is granting de facto amnesty to almost all illegal aliens

[PRB]

What race? is there some race other than Human?

Race is an old word, today the better word is population or ancestry. There's a reason people who are albinos, cannot hide or lose their ancestral and inherited traits, why Africans still have thicker lips and curlier hair. So within the human race, there's many populations which have measurable and distinct characteristics, this is the basis of "racial profiling" regardless of whether it's moral or fair.

 

[PRB]

No, I asked about 'the law's effect on well tanned Americans.' You then carried it off into race and albinos and such. I'm still trying to figure out what you are after with that.

Ok, then I think I answered you, that the law's effect may carry on to people of similar skin color though not similar ancestry and national origin. However, knowing that race is NOT but skin deep, police and profilers are likely to look at other traits, all depends.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Race is an old word, today the better word is population or ancestry. There's a reason people who are albinos, cannot hide or lose their ancestral and inherited traits, why Africans still have thicker lips and curlier hair. So within the human race, there's many populations which have measurable and distinct characteristics, this is the basis of "racial profiling" regardless of whether it's moral or fair.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Ok, then I think I answered you, that the law's effect may carry on to people of similar skin color though not similar ancestry and national origin. However, knowing that race is NOT but skin deep, police and profilers are likely to look at other traits, all depends.

Are you suggesting the justification of a different application of law amongst the different racial origins of man?

 

[PRB]

Are you suggesting the justification of a different application of law amongst the different racial origins of man?

Nope. I believe this all started with "if the goal is to make Mexicans uncomfortable and unwelcome, it would be logical to harass people who look Mexican". So no, I am not suggesting the justification of any law. However, immigration and border laws are inherent race based, even if indirectly via national origin and citizenship.

 

[pcosmar]

So why is this CFR plan being attributed to Obama?.

First I heard of it ,, it was being pushed by Jeb Bush.
http://www.cfr.org/immigration/us-immigration-policy/p20030
Though the last amnesty bill was a Bush push too.

little memory bump
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053849/posts

 

[PRB]

example of a person who still looks rather oriental/Asian despite being albino, I could be wrong, as it's a first glance and the pictures are not very clear.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Nope. I believe this all started with "if the goal is to make Mexicans uncomfortable and unwelcome, it would be logical to harass people who look Mexican". So no, I am not suggesting the justification of any law. However, immigration and border laws are inherent race based, even if indirectly via national origin and citizenship.

 

[DamianTV]

if it's not about race, what would be the problem if we just legalized them and gave them amnesty? is there any correlation between legality and asking for benefits?

Why dont we just offer Welfare to every citizen of every country then? Or perhaps it is the benefits (source: Govt) that is the problem?

 

[PRB]

Why dont we just offer Welfare to every citizen of every country then? Or perhaps it is the benefits (source: Govt) that is the problem?

I think you answered your own question. The answer to government is less government, not more.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

if it's not about race, what would be the problem if we just legalized them and gave them amnesty? is there any correlation between legality and asking for benefits?

It's about citizenship in an organized polity. It has been many era since tribalism dominated man, and more recently on this continent, but still centuries ago. The nation-state has taken the planet, and in the majority of them citizenship is entirely independent of race. This is particularly true in the United States of America.

 

[FloralScent]

You forget that the extra body in the labor market also needs to be fed, clothed, sheltered, entertained...etc. It all works out in the end.

You're assuming those displaced by the lower wage workers have been able to find employment. If this is not the case there is no "extra".

 

[AlexAmore]

You're assuming those displaced by the lower wage workers have been able to find employment. If this is not the case there is no "extra".

Learn what a labor market is before lecturing me on economics.

The labor market is the pool of eligible laborers. It doesn't imply/assume gainful employment.

The extra food, clothing, shelter, and entertainment required by the immigrant will demand more manpower. Therefore the labor market will have more demand for the displaced worker.

You can't look at economics purely from a micro level because that's where anecdotal evidence lives and breeds. If we didn't allow cheap labor and machines (a form of cheap labor) take over, we'd all still be working on family farms.

 

[PRB]

It's about citizenship in an organized polity. It has been many era since tribalism dominated man, and more recently on this continent, but still centuries ago. The nation-state has taken the planet, and in the majority of them citizenship is entirely independent of race. This is particularly true in the United States of America.

what's so good about limiting citizenship privileges and making people wait to become citizens? in other words, what's wrong with legalizing the 10+ million in this country now, if it's not a racial problem? Especially if they want to become equal, pay taxes, vote, work..etc (not that you'd be so statist to require that citizens must work).

 

[PRB]

Learn what a labor market is before lecturing me on economics.

The labor market is the pool of eligible laborers. It doesn't imply/assume gainful employment.

The extra food, clothing, shelter, and entertainment required by the immigrant will demand more manpower.

no, or else they wouldn't be cheap in the first place. The whole point and reason of them being cheap is because they consume less.

Therefore the labor market will have more demand for the displaced worker.

That's assuming the displaced are willing to work for even cheaper.

You can't look at economics purely from a micro level because that's where anecdotal evidence lives and breeds. If we didn't allow cheap labor and machines (a form of cheap labor) take over, we'd all still be working on family farms.

agreed!

 

[PRB]

You're assuming those displaced by the lower wage workers have been able to find employment. If this is not the case there is no "extra".

you are correct, that IS the assumption. But equally absurd is the notion that people need to be employed to live. There's no guarantee that displaced workers will find newer or better jobs, but there's also no rule that says you must work to stay alive.

 

[DamianTV]

you are correct, that IS the assumption. But equally absurd is the notion that people need to be employed to live. There's no guarantee that displaced workers will find newer or better jobs, but there's also no rule that says you must work to stay alive.

The need to be employed to survive can easily be offset by Welfare, or by being filthy rich.

 

[AlexAmore]

no, or else they wouldn't be cheap in the first place. The whole point and reason of them being cheap is because they consume less.

And they create cheaper products for everybody.

That's assuming the displaced are willing to work for even cheaper.

Maybe temporarily. An influx of cheap laborers brings with it an influx of businesses. It also makes it easier and cheaper to start a new business which can grow and eventually provide jobs to Americans who demand higher wages and benefits not pertinent to a budding business. Being able to hire cheap labor gives people more choices and if you trust the free market, then you must allow people to make as many choices as possible.

Even if border supporters had their doomsday scenarios follow through, Americans aren't entitled to any job. Right off the bat you're supporting a government policy based on entitlement, not the free market. Lets get that clear. You're showing strong signs of nationalism which is an extreme vulnerability that elites can easily exploit (history is littered with examples). I wouldn't promote any nationalist ideals to the masses, all you're doing is creating sheep.

 

[PRB]

The need to be employed to survive can easily be offset by Welfare, or by being filthy rich.

or taking care of oneself, minding one's own business, you know, how farmers used to, or Amish still do. Radical idea huh?

 

[PRB]

And they create cheaper products for everybody.

Maybe temporarily. An influx of cheap laborers brings with it an influx of businesses.

I think that is definitely temporary, influx of cheap labor brings influx of cheap products and services, but unless consumption catches on, it'll eventually be useless piles of cheap products nobody needs.

It also makes it easier and cheaper to start a new business which can grow and eventually provide jobs to Americans who demand higher wages and benefits not pertinent to a budding business.

We should make starting businesses easier anyway, regardless of whether we have more immigrants and automation. But opportunities and demand of new businesses are irrespective of whether cheap labor increases (and even often independent of government regulations). People who want to start a business aren't always stopped by regulations.

Being able to hire cheap labor gives people more choices and if you trust the free market, then you must allow people to make as many choices as possible.

Agreed. And even that has its limits. I think this is where people who are concerned about immigration have a point, this is a social issue rather than an equality and human rights issue. What if labor was one day worthless? What if automation became so good that people are worth nothing as workers unless they're highly educated? That means the cheap labor immigrants (and their children) will become consumers rather than workers, but is that a bad thing? Probably not. I guess it's a bad thing if you don't want immigrants to have good lives.

Even if border supporters had their doomsday scenarios follow through, Americans aren't entitled to any job.

you mean to tell me the Constitution doesn't guarantee my right to life, liberty and a job to pursue happiness?

Right off the bat you're supporting a government policy based on entitlement, not the free market. Lets get that clear. You're showing strong signs of nationalism which is an extreme vulnerability that elites can easily exploit (history is littered with examples). I wouldn't promote any nationalist ideals to the masses, all you're doing is creating sheep.

I'm showing signs of nationalism? I think I've been advocating more immigrants and less regulations the whole time...