Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
New at Reason
Shikha Dalmia celebrates the Fourth of July by torching the Senate immigration bill.
Comments to "New at Reason":
The Wine Commonsewer® | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 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
keyboard sonata | July 4, 2007, 1:25pm | #
CAPITAL CRIMES.TLB | July 4, 2007, 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.
This country is leading so towards Totalitarian...It's look'n more like a dictatorship EVERY DAY.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.
-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.
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.
Alice | July 4, 2007, 1:53pm | #
Long Live the Great Wall of AmericaJim Walsh | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 2:07pm | #
TLB, I'm going to ask again: why do you capitalize CertainPhrases the way you do?Akira MacKenzie | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 2:22pm | #
Just wanted to share thishttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/world/africa/04mauritania.html
| July 4, 2007, 2:27pm | #
PHAT!Brandybuck | July 4, 2007, 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.Edward | July 4, 2007, 2:49pm | #
Who's Badnarik?crimethink | July 4, 2007, 2:54pm | #
EverybodyDrink!El Blog del LocoSolo | July 4, 2007, 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.
An Ottawa Reader | July 4, 2007, 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.
Isaac Bartram | July 4, 2007, 3:52pm | #
Ottawa ReaderEasy 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 | July 4, 2007, 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.
So Daniel, just to clarify, do you consider Reason to be an inappropriate name for a magazine espousing these views?
Daniel | July 4, 2007, 4:54pm | #
Probably not, although I dont quite understand if you are simply mocking me or are asking a serious question.kwais | July 4, 2007, 5:00pm | #
Crimethink,We might have to only do half shots on this one. The mandatory drinking is getting out of control already.
Aresen | July 4, 2007, 5:02pm | #
Sparky | July 4, 2007, 4:49pm | #Was that entrapment?
Only if you feel you need an excuse to take a drink.
kwais | July 4, 2007, 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.
Aresen | July 4, 2007, 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
crimethink | July 4, 2007, 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!
crimethink | July 4, 2007, 5:13pm | #
Sorry, that last comment was for kwais, not Kwix.kwais | July 4, 2007, 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.
crimethink | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 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.
The Green Phantom | July 4, 2007, 6:06pm | #
(Sound of lonewacko knocking over yet another strawman...)Aresen | July 4, 2007, 6:59pm | #
BeeI 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."
kwais | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 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 | July 4, 2007, 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.[sinister tone of voice] "Shikha Dalmia"? That's a... foreign name, isn't it? [/sinister tone of voice]
Mike Laursen | July 4, 2007, 8:29pm | #
Apparently, TLB writes quite normally when writing about Canada. Interesting.Isaac Bartram | July 4, 2007, 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.
wacko | July 4, 2007, 9:08pm | #
TLB,I don't follow you. What MassiveSubsidies are you talking about?
kwais | July 4, 2007, 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® | July 5, 2007, 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.
M | July 5, 2007, 12:59am | #
I would've stopped at cerebrate. After all, at a magazine called Reason...The Wine Commonsewer® | July 5, 2007, 1:36am | #
cerebrate.How'd you know?
The Wine Commonsewer theme song. Bloomfield rocks.
MikeP | July 5, 2007, 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.
Lamar | July 5, 2007, 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.
Andy | July 5, 2007, 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 | July 5, 2007, 9:23am | #
"I see that the Reasonoids are up to their old tricks on illegal immigration. "they are indeed a wily bunch.
Tacos mmm | July 5, 2007, 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.
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 | July 5, 2007, 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 | July 6, 2007, 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
MikeP | July 6, 2007, 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.
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.
J Golden Rockwell | July 8, 2007, 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).
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.