Aging population and housing

[spdrun]

It also seems to give scholarships, promote cultural events, provide academic help to those who need it.

I highly doubt that the majority of its members care a union of California and Mexico. Especially since Mexico is a conquered region as well, and far from the ideal of Aztlan.

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun]It also seems to give scholarships, promote cultural events, provide academic help to those who need it.

I highly doubt that the majority of its members care a union of California and Mexico. Especially since Mexico is a conquered region as well, and far from the ideal of Aztlan.[/quote]

I beg to differ on that. If you take a Chicano Studies class in California, you’re likely to understand it a bit more.

BTW, this is why those “white racists” get so riled up about the Mexican flag being flown in the U.S., often in a defiant fashion. They are well aware of this movement and the intentions behind the symbolism. I’m honestly surprised that more white people (and people of other races) aren’t aware of it.

[spdrun]

[quote=CA renter]We prefer to have different cultures, governments, economies, etc. so that people can choose something other than what they currently have. Migration has always been a part of human history, and I would never want it to be otherwise, but eliminating borders and consolidating governments, currencies, trade rules, economies, religious preferences, ethnicities, (even races) etc. is not a positive thing, IMO.
[/quote]

Open borders won’t eliminate diversity in the way that you’re thinking. The US is very regionally diverse, yet has open borders between states.

The EU is also reasonably diverse and has open borders for citizens of any EU country. European borders were also practically open between the Napoleonic Wars and WW I. We only started putting up real walls in the early 1900s.

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun][quote=CA renter]We prefer to have different cultures, governments, economies, etc. so that people can choose something other than what they currently have. Migration has always been a part of human history, and I would never want it to be otherwise, but eliminating borders and consolidating governments, currencies, trade rules, economies, religious preferences, ethnicities, (even races) etc. is not a positive thing, IMO.
[/quote]

Open borders won’t eliminate diversity in the way that you’re thinking. The US is very regionally diverse, yet has open borders between states.

The EU is also reasonably diverse and has open borders for citizens of any EU country. European borders were also practically open between the Napoleonic Wars and WW I.[/quote]

People tend to congregate with others who are similar. It’s perfectly natural.

But open borders are indeed erasing regional differences. These days, it’s much more difficult to tell if someone’s from Texas than it was ~30 years ago. The accents have largely disappeared, and the cultural differences (if you can call it that) between states has been muted.

The Europeans are worried about losing their national and cultural identities, too. It’s 100% natural, and there is nothing wrong with that. People can call it nationalism (not saying that’s a bad thing), or even racism, but it is as much a part of human nature as greed and hoarding. It’s a survival instinct.

[spdrun]

That’s just the ease of travel and mass communication. Last I checked, the last time state borders were closed was during the Civil War.

There’s something to be said about congregating with those who are similar. Maybe that’s why as a 2nd generation American, I feel more empathy with Latinos who are either immigrants, or children of immigrants, than with people whose distant ancestors came off the Mayflower.

[CA renter]

Let’s even consider political persuasions. You’re pretty liberal. What would you say the ratio is between your conservative and liberal friends, particularly those you would consider close friends?

I believe you’re an atheist, right? How many extremely religious people are on your short list of really good friends?

How about Brian? How many conservative:liberal friends? Religious vs. non-religious friends? Dirty vs. clean friends (close friends whom you choose to spend time with)?

Some people like to live in a very clean, quiet neighborhood, while others like a lively environment with people coming over every day. Can these two types of people coexist peacefully?

I think it would be more beneficial if we acknowledged that people have different preferences and let those who want to live in a particular way find others like themselves and form communities of like-minded individuals (countries, states, cities, etc.). And for people who really like diversity, let them live in very diverse regions with others who enjoy the same things. Forcing one group to live with another group really doesn’t solve any problems. If anything, it tends to reinforce stereotypes and cause more friction between the two groups. We should just let everyone live the way they would prefer to live, with people who are most similar to them (even in their diversity).

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun]That’s just the ease of travel and mass communication. Last I checked, the last time state borders were closed was during the Civil War.

There’s something to be said about congregating with those who are similar. Maybe that’s why as a 2nd generation American, I feel more empathy with Latinos who are either immigrants, or children of immigrants, than with people whose distant ancestors came off the Mayflower.[/quote]

Yes, it’s the ease of travel and also electronic communications. But that’s what open borders would facilitate.

And I also understand the perspective of immigrants because I’m a first-generation American on my mother’s side, but an 11th generation American on my father’s side, going back to the early 1600s (accident of accidents, my paternal grandparents were born in the 1800s). I’ve grown up with immigrants and most of my friends are immigrants or first-generation Americans.

But I’m also a realist, and know that open borders and generous social safety nets are completely incompatible. Since I strongly favor generous social safety nets (and workers’ rights and well-being), I favor highly-controlled immigration policies.

[spdrun]

I have quite a few conservative friends — some of them are even open minded enough to enjoy arguing about politics 🙂 As long as they’re respectful about it, and are truly conservative vs being bigoted, they’ll remain friends.

As far as religion, I’m more of an agnostic, but I’m seeing someone who’s a somewhat religious Catholic, went to see the Pope and all that. Tolerant, but religious nonetheless.

I disagree that safety nets and open borders are incompatible. Require ID for government services, don’t provide them to non-citizens. Open borders =/= open citizenship. There should still be a naturalization process.

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun]I have quite a few conservative friends — some of them are even open minded enough to enjoy arguing about politics 🙂 As long as they’re respectful about it, and are truly conservative vs being bigoted, they’ll remain friends.

As far as religion, I’m more of an agnostic, but I’m seeing someone who’s a somewhat religious Catholic, went to see the Pope and all that. Tolerant, but religious nonetheless.

I disagree that safety nets and open borders are incompatible. Require ID for government services, don’t provide them to non-citizens. Open borders =/= open citizenship. There should still be a naturalization process.[/quote]

Who doesn’t enjoy arguing about politics? 😉

What about infrastructure costs? Who should have to pay for that? What about schools? Should we educate the children of illegal immigrants at the cost of ~$10,000/year? Who should pay for that?

I’ve long suggested that having a guest worker program here should incorporate a “benefits entitlement” card for the worker and all of his/her dependents. The employer should have to pay the cost of this card, and the cost of these cards should reflect the true cost of the public services and infrastructure being used by the guest worker and his/her dependents. All employers would be mandated to use the E-Verify system, or risk steep fines and possible forfeiture of their property.

If employers had to do this, the real cost of their employees would be made obvious, and they would quickly realize that they could hire American citizens for the same money or less. They are only hiring the illegal immigrants because taxpayers (and other workers) are subsidizing the costs.

[spdrun]

How would a “benefits entitlement” card even work, considering most schools are local or state funded and immigration is nationally controlled?

In most states outside of CA, school funding is largely from property taxes. Commercial property is taxed higher than residential, generally speaking. Therefore any employer that has a place of business is already paying more school tax.

As far as welfare beenfits, I could see denying them to non-citizens. But not unemployment or social security, if the guest worker has worked for the requisite time period and paid into the system.

[FlyerInHi]

CAr, you sound nativist, paranoid and xenophobic.

So what if the world charges. Future generations will have to choose what’s best for them. If in the future, you don’t like the changes in your neighborhood, you can vote with your feet.

Is it so shocking the Jorge Ramos has his opinions? It’s no sign of a wide conspiracy of any sort. Personally, I’m all for a Schengen type region in North America. That makes the most economic and humanitarian sense.

There are competing ideas and may the best win!

Btw, unauthorized immigrants are not getting welfare benefits. But kids do get to go to school. That’s good.

[FlyerInHi]

And so far, all the changes since the Reagan amnesty have been positive.
Glad we replaced Bob Dornan with Loretta Sanchez.
Glad that Duncan Hunter moved from Coronado to Alpine. Maybe his son, Jr. will eventually find a more hospitable environment in Kansas.

[CA renter]

[quote=spdrun]How would a “benefits entitlement” card even work, considering most schools are local or state funded and immigration is nationally controlled?

In most states outside of CA, school funding is largely from property taxes. Commercial property is taxed higher than residential, generally speaking. Therefore any employer that has a place of business is already paying more school tax.

As far as welfare beenfits, I could see denying them to non-citizens. But not unemployment or social security, if the guest worker has worked for the requisite time period and paid into the system.[/quote]

The fact that immigration laws are federal doesn’t change the fact that states are the ones to shoulder most of the burden. The way I envision it, it would be a state-run program. The average per-capita cost of our infrastructure budget (roads, publicly-funded water distribution and reclamation costs, prisons, public safety, prisons, etc.) would be reflected in the price of the benefit card. Schools could be an add-on if the worker has minor dependents, with the full per-capita cost of the student(s) being added to the price of the card. Any student trying to enroll in a public school would be required to either show proof of citizenship or a benefit card.

Unemployment would be an entitlement only if the employee paid into the system, and any abuse would result in deportation. I’m mixed on Social Security. Personally, I would not require them to pay into the SS system, and they would not be entitled to any SS benefits.

No welfare for anyone other that American citizens.

BTW, I’m not aware of commercial/industrial property owners paying a higher property tax rate. In fact, they often pay a lower rate because of the corporate loophole. And agricultural properties are often taxed at an even lower rate.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]CAr, you sound nativist, paranoid and xenophobic.

So what if the world charges. Future generations will have to choose what’s best for them. If in the future, you don’t like the changes in your neighborhood, you can vote with your feet.

Is it so shocking the Jorge Ramos has his opinions? It’s no sign of a wide conspiracy of any sort. Personally, I’m all for a Schengen type region in North America. That makes the most economic and humanitarian sense.

There are competing ideas and may the best win!

Btw, unauthorized immigrants are not getting welfare benefits. But kids do get to go to school. That’s good.[/quote]

Brian, the “racist, xenophobic, bigoted, paranoid, nativist (as a negative)” labels are overused and worn out. They have been used as a means to censor those with dissenting opinions; therefore, they are 100% invalid. Name-calling doesn’t work; try arguing with facts and logic, instead.

And your claim that everything is better since Reagan’s amnesty is not backed by reality. The wages and purchasing power of American citizens is down; our infrastructure is crumbling; our social welfare systems, prisons, and schools are overwhelmed; and our housing prices are far above what American citizens can afford because illegal immigrants compete for housing, and can often pay more than American families from the same socio-economic class because they are willing to live with multiple families/generations in a SFH. And neighborhoods that have a high percentage of illegal immigrants tend to have much higher crime rates. No, things are not better because of rampant, unchecked illegal immigration. I have no idea where you get that nonsense from.

[spdrun]

CAr – outside of CA, commercial property is often taxed at a higher rate than residential as regards value.

As far as schools, I have a really bad feeling about punishing kids for the crimes of their parents by denying them an education. If anything that would increase crime.

[Author]

Posts