Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
New at Reason
Shikha Dalmia celebrates the Fourth of July by torching the Senate immigration bill.
The Wine Commonsewer®|7.4.07 @ 12:07PM|#
The assumption behind the point-system is that bureaucrats
can invent a better immigration policy than the spontaneous choices
and needs of Americans.
But the government is soooooo ooooooh good at this kind of
stuff.
Nobody much cares but the truth is there is nobody alive today
whose forebears didn't come here from somewhere else.
Alice Bowie|7.4.07 @ 1:12PM|#
This country is leading so towards Totalitarian...It's look'n
more like a dictatorship EVERY DAY.
-The President Does what he wan't
-The so-called "Less Governmennt" republicans consistantly pass
laws destroying civil liberties and negate laws which protect
-The Great Wall of America is coming up
-This supreme court will assure the return of the good ol days of
Coat hangers, Race riots, closeted homos, etc., etc., etc.
GOD BLESS AMERICA and the divine Guided wisdom of the Ronald Reagon
Replicans...I feel so so safe now
TLB|7.4.07 @ 1:31PM|#
Ah, the "libertarian" magazine Reason. They want employers to be
able to invite anyone here and they claim that they oppose
GovernmentSubsidies. Yet, what would happen in practice is that the
first would come to pass, but the second would not. Reason is,
in effect, supporting MassiveSubsidies, where
companies get cheap ForeignLabor which the rest of us have to pay
for ("privatize the profits, socialize the costs").
And, by promoting ImmigrationAnarchy, Reason is also setting the
stage for an authoritarian figure to come in and fix the mess with
things like a NationalIDCard and others.
Reason is, in effect, supporting a diminution of
CivilLiberties.
Perhaps Reason isn't what it says it is.
|7.4.07 @ 1:38PM|#
This country is leading so towards Totalitarian...It's look'n more like a dictatorship EVERY DAY.
-The President Does what he wan't
-The so-called "Less Governmennt" republicans consistantly pass laws destroying civil liberties and negate laws which protect
-The Great Wall of America is coming up
-This supreme court will assure the return of the good ol days of Coat hangers, Race riots, closeted homos, etc., etc., etc.
Well there is some truth there. The Bush administration hasn't been
particularly favorable to principles of civil liberties and checks
& balances. However, the courts reigned in the worst excesses
of his attempted assersion of power and hopefully general
dissatisfaction with Bush will result in a backlash his against
idea of expansive executive power.
As for the religious right, they'll make alot of noise, but I doubt
they'll ever be able to re-impose a regime of legally enforced
sexual repression.
|7.4.07 @ 2:02PM|#
I must decline to thank Squawk Radio, thank you.
They're just doing what they do best: preaching to the choir and
pandering to idiots.
Mike Laursen|7.4.07 @ 2:07PM|#
TLB, I'm going to ask again: why do you capitalize CertainPhrases the way you do?
|7.4.07 @ 2:12PM|#
TLB, I'm going to ask again: why do you capitalize
CertainPhrases the way you do?
Yeah, and what's with his inability to use a space bar at certain
points? I guess paranoia and bigotry leads to rotten typing
skills.
Grand Chalupa|7.4.07 @ 2:22PM|#
Just wanted to share this
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/world/africa/04mauritania.html
|7.4.07 @ 2:42PM|#
I think it was Badnarik who said, "an open door policy doesn't mean you can climb in through the bedroom window ". I am in favor of immigration... legal immigration. I would grant visas to anyone who has a job lined up, for as long as they have that job (with a six month window). Student visas for anyone accepted at a school. And six month visas for anyone else (no more than once per two year period). Let them all in. But they need to come in through the front door! They need to have a background check, and need to check in once every three months.
|7.4.07 @ 3:05PM|#
Ay, el compartimiento "libertarian" Razón. Quisieran que los
patrones pudieran invitar cualquier persona aquí y demandan que
oponen SubsidiosDeGobierno. Todavía, qué sucedería en la práctica
es que el primer vendría pasar, pero el segundo no . La Razón,
en efecto, está apoyando los SubsidiosMasivos,
donde las compañías consiguen el TrabajoExtranjero barato el cual
el resto de nosotros tiene que pagar ("privatice los beneficios,
socializa los costes").
Y, promoviendo AnarquíaDeLaInmigración, la razón también está
fijando la etapa para que una figura autoritaria venga adentro y
fije el lío con cosas como una TarjetaNacionalDeLaIdentificación y
otras.
La Razón, en efecto, está apoyando una disminución
de LibertadesCiviles.
Quizás la Razón no es lo que dice que es.
|7.4.07 @ 3:14PM|#
Ah yes, the point system. God knows how many descendants of
United Empire Loyalist and French colonists would be barred from
Canada if they had to apply for admission themselves.
It's not designed to bring high-skilled people in. It's designed to
keep low-skilled people out. To...what's the idea? Ah yes...to
protect the jobs and wages of low-skilled Canadians.
In other words, to save lazy, half-literate, inbred facsimiles of
the Trailer Park Boys (yes, people like that do exist, in English
and French Canada) the trouble of pulling themselves together,
learning a skill and fecking off down the road to the city, or the
oil sands, where there's plenty of jobs, and good jobs. It's the
cities, after all (Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal) where
immigrants go. You'd think Canadians would have the sense to do
that, if immigrants do.
But no--it's far easier to vote for politicians who'll tell you
what you want to hear, give you handouts and blame all your
problems on the terrorists, so you can drink your life away in
McButtfuck, Ontario, or Saint-Christ-de-Tabarnak, Quebec.
|7.4.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Ottawa Reader
Easy now, lad, we all know from everything in our media that
Canadians are all cultured, gentle, educated people who live long
happy lives and never commit acts of violence and never display
racism or any other prejudice.
They are all devoted to conflict resolution in a world rules by UN
bureaucrats (a goodly number of whom will, quite rightly, be
Canadians, drawn from the membership of the NDP).
Of course, according to our media you also all live lives of rugged
self-reliance in log cabins heated with wood burning stoves in a
land of perpetual ice and snow.
Are you telling me our media is wrong?
Daniel|7.4.07 @ 4:41PM|#
Thank you Reason, for reminding me why normal people will never
support the so-called 'libertarian' immigration plan - of open
borders anarchy.
With your use of 'comprehensive immigration reform' and other La
Raza propaganda terms, it made me wonder if I was reading Reason,
or the editorial page of the New York Times. Then, to make things
worse, you here at Reason pledge your support for sanctuary cities
laws - I guess it is a bad thing to deport criminals - Reason would
prefer to spend tax payer dollars keeping them locked up.
|7.4.07 @ 4:49PM|#
So Daniel, just to clarify, do you consider Reason to be an inappropriate name for a magazine espousing these views?
Daniel|7.4.07 @ 4:54PM|#
Probably not, although I dont quite understand if you are simply mocking me or are asking a serious question.
|7.4.07 @ 5:00PM|#
Crimethink,
We might have to only do half shots on this one. The mandatory
drinking is getting out of control already.
|7.4.07 @ 5:02PM|#
Sparky | July 4, 2007, 4:49pm | #
Was that entrapment?
Only if you feel you need an excuse to take a drink.
|7.4.07 @ 5:06PM|#
ElBlogDel Solo Loco,
He de confesar que no he leido el articulo.
Pero seriamente, si la problema es que los imigrantes estan
recibiendo demasiados subsidios, entonces la solucion mas simple
seria que paramos de dejar que los imigrantes reciba subsidios. No
crees?
Si cesamos dando a los imigrantes subsidios entonces sus
empleadores tendran que pagarlos suficiente para que ellos mismos
pueden pagar para los servicios que son normalmente
subsidios.
En tal caso los imigrantes estaran viviendo en un paraiso
libertario. Habran Americanos que querran ser tratados como
imigrantes.
|7.4.07 @ 5:07PM|#
Isaac Bartram | July 4, 2007, 3:52pm | #
***
Are you telling me our media is wrong?
If any of us actually knew how to read up here or had 'lectricity
so's we could lissen to the wireless, we'd let you know if they
were wrong.
;P
|7.4.07 @ 5:12PM|#
Kwix,
That's OK -- the full ones go down well with the BlackBeanBurritos
we're having tonight for the 4th. ¡Ay de mi!
|7.4.07 @ 5:22PM|#
mmm, a ChickenBurrito is what would hit the spot RightNow. But a
BlackBeanBurrito, would do nicely too.
Also, in honor of this thread, I think the command should be;
'EveryBodyDrinkNow'
From now on.
|7.4.07 @ 5:33PM|#
kwais,
I don't think so, that reminds me of the "Everybody Dance Now!"
song of my childhood years, which I always thought was "Everybody's
Pants Down!"
Needless to say, I had a couple of bad experiences at birthday
parties at that time.
Bee|7.4.07 @ 5:35PM|#
After getting an XM radio last year and listening to an entire
season of hockey broadcasting, I have concluded that Canadians are
kinda neurotic. Really, stop obsessing about the US. Please. You're
nice people - ok, maybe you're a little passive-aggressive,
especially when American teams are beating Canadian teams - but the
obsessing thing is sad. Believe me, we do not burn a lot of
calories obsessing about *you*.
Oh, and Mounties are hott.
Daniel, I wasn't sure what you meant by 'sanctuary cities laws'. If
you mean that we support cities making and enforcing their own
laws, then...yeah, we do support that. One of the tenets of
libertarianism would be government devolution - the concept of
rolling back government to whatever services are needed at a state
or municipal level.
|7.4.07 @ 6:59PM|#
Bee
I know exactly what you mean about "obsessive". I wish a lot of my
countrymen would just relax and enjoy what they've got instead of
worrying about Americans having more/being bigger/always winning,
etc.
OTOH, when it comes to "cheering for the home team', I confess to
being as guilty as anyone else. I took great delight after the Salt
Lake City Olympics in sending my California cousin an e-mail:
"Congratulations USA on your two SILVER medals in hockey."
|7.4.07 @ 7:06PM|#
Crimethink,
Maybe on one of the threads where there are too many drinks, and it
is hard to keep up, people can do the 'pants down' routine instead
of drinking.
Think about it. It would cause the people in the office to
wonder.
Uncle Sam|7.4.07 @ 7:11PM|#
We might have to only do half shots on this one. The mandatory drinking is getting out of control already.
Hey live a little! It's the 4th of July!
Paul|7.4.07 @ 8:02PM|#
Hey guys, I know who TLB is. It's Bill fucking SerGio. It's the only thing that could explain the odd sentence construction and strange uses of random caps.
|7.4.07 @ 8:06PM|#
[sinister tone of voice] "Shikha Dalmia"? That's a... foreign name, isn't it? [/sinister tone of voice]
Mike Laursen|7.4.07 @ 8:29PM|#
Apparently, TLB writes quite normally when writing about Canada. Interesting.
|7.4.07 @ 8:50PM|#
Apparently it's a subsidy in LonelyLunatic land when business
are allowed to STAY IN BUSINESS.
But then what do I care. I'm not a businessman that needs to hire
unskilled labor.
Empty your own goddamn wastebasket. And live with the fact that the
washroom only gets cleaned once a week instead of every day. You'll
get used to the smell.
|7.4.07 @ 10:44PM|#
I think what TLB means by subsidies for illegal immigrants, is
that they get to have their kids use public schools, and they get
to partake of whatever public healthcare there is.
If that is his complaint, I am cool with it. I understand, the
subsides of the illegal immigrants social services are seen as a
corporate subsidy.
So, I am cool with not allowing the immigrants the public social
services. But then we can't tax them or the companies they work for
either.
Which would be totally cool.
The Wine Commonsewer®|7.5.07 @ 12:48AM|#
4th of July is cool because you can blast music, watch
fireworks, drink, celebrate (shit took three tries to get
celebrate right), and listen to your kids belt out
Proud to be an American.
We did big parties for 18 years, Next year I think we'll resume the
tradition.
You are all invited.
The Wine Commonsewer®|7.5.07 @ 1:36AM|#
cerebrate.
How'd you know?
The Wine Commonsewer theme song.
Bloomfield rocks.
|7.5.07 @ 1:39AM|#
Tonight's 4th of July movie on Telemundo was Independence
Day.
Interestingly, while the movie was dubbed into English, the
subtitles for the English language captioning were liberally
sprinkled with ConcatenatedCapitalizedWords.
|7.5.07 @ 7:02AM|#
TLB seems to think that anything can be characterized as a
government subsidy. If the government isn't taxing oil companies,
it's a subsidy for wind farm propellor makers. If the government
doesn't regulate and tax the internet, it's a subsidy for ebay. If
your wife doesn't have big tits, it's a subsidy for the push-up bra
industry, and so on. If public schools and healthcare are a
corporate subsidy, we at least have to admit that those "subsidies"
are open to citizens as well as immigrants because the taxes paid
by a single person don't cover the costs of that person's use.
Gov't entitlement programs, like insurance, spread the cost.
Daniel, on the other hand, can't be bothered to make even a
coherent argument. Propaganda this, La Raza that, what the hell is
he talking about? When you have a problem in, say, immigration, and
you set out to reform that process, why wouldn't you call it
immigration reform? What is your suggestion? Daniel decries what he
sees as propaganda cheap shots, then ends with his own "I guess
it's bad to deport criminals." Daniel, if somebody breaks into this
country, then commits a crime, what makes you think that they won't
be released in their own country and reenter here to commit more
crime? If you catch a murderer, you're going to let them go to a
corrupt system where a bribe can set them free? Or even worse,
where the local system could collaterally attack the US conviction
and/or sentence? Nice job thinking things through. Why not say "I
hate immigrants so much that I'd rather set criminals free that
have them in a US prison."
Talk radio is for idiots who need to be fed information. Blogs are
for thinking folks who can actually defend their ideas.
|7.5.07 @ 8:59AM|#
I see that the Reasonoids are up to their old tricks on illegal
immigration. The key reason the bill should have (and did fail) was
the amnesty or Z-visa. The Z-visa would have been very easy to get
in the original form of the bill: pay a fine, pass a 24 hr
background check and pay a fine. That's it! Then, all of the 12-20
million illegal immigrants have a visa and are now here legally.
So, the rest of the crap, never really works as a way to deter
illegal immigration.
The bill was bad in all it's components. The amnesty provision is
what got the talk-show hosts to light a fire under their listeners
who crashed the Senate phone system.
dhex|7.5.07 @ 9:23AM|#
"I see that the Reasonoids are up to their old tricks on illegal
immigration. "
they are indeed a wily bunch.
|7.5.07 @ 11:17AM|#
So, the rest of the crap, never really works as a way to deter illegal immigration.
Seems to me that the best way to deter illegal immigration is to
make legal immigration easier.
Robert|7.5.07 @ 1:05PM|#
Seems everyone agrees immigration law in the USA & Canada, and probably many other countries, is bad. We disagree on various desiderata to fix it; however, there must be some points we can practically all agree on. How about someone come up with reforms, however limited, pleasing to all, that could actually be enacted in various countries?
LarryA|7.5.07 @ 1:23PM|#
Every Fourth of July Kerrville has a community patriotic sing, and I get to read the Declaration of Independence. As many of you know, it contains a list of the heinous crimes committed against the people of the colonies by King George. But do you remember the sixth greviance?
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws of Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
Reason is, in effect, supporting MassiveSubsidies, where
companies get cheap ForeignLabor which the rest of us have to pay
for ("privatize the profits, socialize the costs").
Not true, but for fun suppose it is. If business hire cheap labor
competition will force them to reduce prices for their customers.
We win. If immigration is legal the workers pay taxes to support
any social benefits. Even if their taxes don't completely cover
their medical care, education, etc. this will be more than offset
by lowering the law enforcement/regulation/business HR costs of
keeping illegal immigrants unemployed. We win again.
And, by promoting ImmigrationAnarchy, Reason is also setting
the stage for an authoritarian figure to come in and fix the mess
with things like a NationalIDCard and others.
Uh. It's illegal immigration that leads to "immigration anarchy."
The legislation we're talking about, by requiring employers to
positively ID every employee, requires a national
ID system, massive databases, and intrusive recordkeeping to keep
employers from hiring illegals. Reason opposes the
legislation in question because legalizing immigration
reduces the need for national ID, etc.
The bill was bad in all it's components. The amnesty provision
is what got the talk-show hosts to light a fire under their
listeners who crashed the Senate phone system.
Which was exactly what the Reason article said.
however, there must be some points we can practically all agree
on.
The talk show hosts and the anti-illegal immigration folks aren't
just opposed to amnesty or illegal immigration, they're opposed to
any immigration whatsoever. "We're here, pull up the drawbridge and
don't let anyone else have the chance we got."
The strange part is that many of the same right-wing folks who want
the government to crack down on undocumented workers and secure the
borders are also opposed to national ID cards, RFID chips, federal
databases, etc. for "Real Americans." And they don't understand the
contradiction.
I'm not particularly in favor of immigration, in that I don't think
we need a "come to the U.S." program. But I do understand that
trying to keep workers who need jobs and employers who need workers
apart creates our present black market in labor. And I know that no
government has ever shut down a black market by force.
Winghunter|7.6.07 @ 12:00AM|#
"The talk show hosts and the anti-illegal immigration folks
aren't just opposed to amnesty or illegal immigration, they're
opposed to any immigration whatsoever. "We're here, pull up the
drawbridge and don't let anyone else have the chance we
got.""
What a spinning, ignorant windbag! God will allow me to meet these
people some day.
* In a 1790 speech to Congress on the naturalization of immigrants,
James Madison stated that America should welcome the immigrant who
could assimilate, but exclude the immigrant who could not readily
"incorporate himself into our society."
Then to several from Alexander Hamilton, all which predict the
perils of multicuturalism, something thats been blessed by the
writers of out children's textbooks.
* In 1802, Alexander Hamilton wrote: "The safety of a republic
depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment;
on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the
citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of
country which will almost invariably be found to be closely
connected with birth, education and family."
* Hamilton further warned that "The United States have already felt
the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their
national mass; by promoting in different classes different
predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and
antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the
community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to
compromise the interests of our own country in favor of
another.
"The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of
great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of
whom there may be just grounds of distrust; the suspicion alone
will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be
actually employed in assisting an invader."
* The survival of the American republic, Hamilton maintained,
depends upon "the preservation of a national spirit and a national
character." "To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of
citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing
less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our
liberty and sovereignty."
We've already seen the affect the progressive attitude that
multiculturalism has in the country we identify most- Great
Britain....
http://www.gettingpaidtowatch.com/?p=47
|7.6.07 @ 1:57AM|#
I can readily believe that Madison thought that the culture that
was springing forth in America was delicate, what with it being the
only example and really only a few decades old. I can also believe
almost anything that Hamilton might have said that insinuates that
the hoi polloi cannot be trusted. That was, after all, his main
theme.
Nonetheless, it is rather startling, is it not, that, if the
founding fathers were such scaredy cats about the deleterious
effects of immigration, they didn't actually write the power to
control immigration into the Constitution.
We have the benefit of over 200 years of hindsight that the
founders did not have. Furthermore, most of us are also not the
raging racists the founders generally were. It is undeniably clear
that the 150 years of essentially free immigration that the United
States started with did not bring any of the traumas that Hamilton
feared. Those fears really don't excuse today's limitations on the
movement, residence, and labor of free individuals.
|7.6.07 @ 11:05AM|#
There are a few very fundamental issues / questions here. Should the USA be allowed to exist as a country? Should the USA be allowed to have any recognized culture? A 700+ page bill for anything is excessive...and damned scary. The idea that the bill contains tests or hurdles which must be completed is laughable. I don't believe for a second that the tests, fines, etc wont simply be waived...or more likely ignored. This bill would become 700+ pages of opportunity for "Sanctuary city" proponents. The "Balkanization" of the country would be codified.
|7.8.07 @ 7:42PM|#
Heinlein had it right (no surprise) in that citizenship should
be EARNED.
I find it interesting to monitor the comments of so many people who
themselves could not qualify to enter this country if they hadn't
been born here, descended of immigrants who themselves were
unwanted by the people who were already here (hint: If you are of
European descent, that's YOU).
|7.12.07 @ 1:23AM|#
There is no need to thank those who killed the immigration bill. They did not do it out of any libertarian instict, but out of a nativist fervor. I do not see any salutory end to this.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245