More '90s Nostalgia

In the latest L.A. Weekly, Ben Ehrenreich details the factional squabbles besetting the Minutemen, that small band of vigilantes devoted to keeping undocumented Mexicans out of the country. Which reminds me of something I've been meaning to get off my chest for a while: Ten years ago, America's right-wing paramilitaries were so anti-government, they thought that driver's licenses were an unbearable infringement on their liberties. Now they're out on the border HELPING THE FEDS ENFORCE THEIR REGULATIONS. What the hell's up with that?

Granted, there's not necessarily much overlap between the two groups. But one has supplanted the other in the mass media, the public imagination, and the affection of the right-wing radio hosts—and so help me, I think I miss the days when I felt a certain kinship with the crazies.

Comments

[Alla]

Are you implying that people that want to prevent anyone from entering the country must be crazy? I’d be all for free immigration if we didn’t have massive welfare programs.
I’m also sure it’s not exactly pleasant to have people trying to enter the country through your neighborhood and often ransacking your home, as I’ve read is the case on the Arizona border.

[joe]

Alla,

I hear you, dude. My city’s problem is drug dealers shooting each other.

So obviously, in both cases, the solution is better enforcement of the law.

Right?

[Alla]

no…that’s not what i meant. i tend to not trust the government to mostly anything. But, I don’t think it’s crazy of people to want the illegal immigration problem stopped and to do something about it.

[Jesse Walker]

I’d be all for free immigration if we didn’t have massive welfare programs.

I’m amazed at the popularity of this argument. I never see libertarians arguing, “I’d be all for legalized liquor if we didn’t have tax-subsidised medical care.”

Anyway, I don’t think people who disagree with me about immigration are crazy, though wanting to prevent “anyone” from entering the country is a pretty loopy position. I was referring to the shifting social stereotype of the so-called “right-wing crazies.”

[Alla]

joe, do you think that legalizing all immigration would really alleviate all problems?

[Brian]

I dunno, but it’s an example of how righties went all statist the instant a republican was elected president. Maybe a memo went out when Bush won the election.

Attn: Right Wingers

Government is now totally awesome in every possible way. Adjust flackery accordingly.

[joe]

Yes. Murder, rape, foot fungus, boy bands, all of ’em. Up and down the line.

Or course not. But I think that this prohibition, like most prohibitions on peaceful behavior, creates problems of violence and racketeering (and in this case, toilet paper in people’s yards) that are much worse than the problem they purport to solve.

[Alla]

I’m not sure I see the connection Jesse.
France, who has an open immigration to its former colonies, has growing welfare entitlements, without a growing tax-paying population. Wouldn’t that be a problem here too if we opened our borders?

[joe]

Brian, how about, this represents a revision to form – righties are naturally drawn to authority, heirarchy, and patriotism.

It was the anti-government Clinton years that required the memo. They weren’t anti-government, they were anti-Clinton, anti-Democrat.

Kill the Pretender! Re-establish the True Dauphin!

[joe]

Will somebody with HTML skills please link to the immigration story in today’s Sploid?

[Alla]

Nevermind Jesse, i suppose i do see the connection. Maybe you’re right.

[drf]

Jesse. Jesse. Jesse.

it’s war now. don’t you see? GWB believes in god so he’s trustworthy. had they listened to the minutemen, we’d be safe. nuke the gay whales and send the meat to africa!!!!! (actual quote from a nutbag i was chatting with at LAX)

[Hakluyt]

alla,

Yes, immigration should made easy. We should have a pro-market immigration policy.

France, who has an open immigration to its former colonies…

Please, France doesn’t have an open immigration policy. France has an allotment system just like the United States does and they regularly bust folks in the Pyrennes, along the coast, etc. trying to enter the country.

…without a growing tax-paying population.

That’s also untrue. France is expected to increase its population by around fifteen million over the next fifty years, with only 25% of that coming from its Muslim population.

Before you start about France know what the fuck you are talking about!

[Mo]

This one joe?

I read quite a laugher yesterday in the Corner. They blamed Japan’s superior advancements in robotics over ours on illegal immigration. It’s not like their superiority in electronics has anything to do with that. Shit, have they seen their cell phones compared to ours?

[Hakluyt]

alla,

France isn’t a real country to people like you. Its a cipher into which you can put any idea (truthful or not) that strikes your fancy.

[Alla]

Hakluyt,
I wasn’t aware..do you have a source? I’ve read over and over that the birth rate in all of Europe is declining, while population is increasing due to Muslim immigration.

[zach]

there’s another H&R t-shirt. “Nuke the gay whales and send the meat to Africa.”

[Randolph Carter]

I heard that in France everyone wears horizontally striped shirts and berets. Am I to take it that these rumors aren’t true? 😉

[passingthru]

“…that small band of vigilantes devoted to keeping undocumented Mexicans out of the country.”

So, when undocumented Mexicans break into your house, do you call them undocumented house guests?

[zach]

shh randolph, you’ll only make him angrier.

[zach]

So, when undocumented Mexicans break into your house, do you call them undocumented house guests?

well that depends. did you document them breaking into your house?

[Alla]

Hakluyt, I hope your generalizing insults do make you feel superior. I was stating an oft-cited notion, which I took to be true, as did people I know from France. But, if you have facts to contrary, do enlighten me.

[joe]

Is it true that that people in France keep mustard in their cars to hand out to inquiring strangers?

[Randolph Carter]

I heard they call their pastries some crazy name like krussant. Also, they say the word for “urine” when they mean yes. What a bunch of sickos!

[Hakluyt]

Alla,

France is the exception to declining birthrates in Europe and every other European country is trying to figure what the difference between France and the rest of Europe is. The U.K.’s population is supposed to remain level between now and 2050, so that makes them an exception as well. I also believe that Ireland has a dramatically increasing population. Now, Italy, Germany, eastern Europe, etc. all have dramatically decreasing populations.

France is expected to have Europe’s largest population by 2050, BTW; this is reflected in the fact that almost of the E.U.’s population growth over the past couple of years has come out of France.

I sure if you googled “France population growth” or something you’d find a link.

[Alla]

thank you. i will do that.

[rafuzo]

I’d be all for free immigration if we didn’t have massive welfare programs.

I’m amazed at the popularity of this argument. I never see libertarians arguing, “I’d be all for legalized liquor if we didn’t have tax-subsidised medical care.”

That’s probably because immigration policy doesn’t stop at the borders. When people cross over looking for the good life, they don’t realize it’s awfully hard to get without a green card. (Note I say “awfully hard”, not “physically impossible”.) As a result they end up in the low rent jobs getting assistance because the government knows they’re there but won’t do anything to help.

I’d be all for free immigration if we didn’t have massive welfare programs – in fact I’m all for a lot of things if we didn’t have massive welfare programs. But more relevant to the discussion, I’m all for a sane immigration policy from soup to nuts. Either they’re illegal and we boot them out when we find them, or we say “Congratulations Kimball, here’s your citizenship as a reward.” Like these policies to give illegals drivers licenses, access to the aforementioned welfare programs, without either a) booting them out of the country or b) teaching them the pledge of allegiance. Proponents of illegal alien assistance suggest every kind of policy imaginable for illegals except LEGALIZING THEM. You actually *help* those people while largely defanging the opposition because, lo, they’ll be paying taxes into the system.

So how about we first stop being half assed about our national immigration policy, whatever it might be.

[Hakluyt]

Alla,

And anyone generally cognizant of European news over the past couple of years should know about this trend, since France has been experiencing a spurt of growth since the late 1990s. It has jumped significantly since 2002-2003 though.

[Matt Welch]

Alla — France is in the midst of a mini-baby boom (maxi, if you compare it to the rest of Old Europe), especially Italy. Births per woman is at least 2.1, possibly 2.3 (too lazy/busy to look).

Also, as I’ve pointed out before in these threads, welfare-for-immigrants was scaled back pretty heavily in the mid-’90s, as part of Welfare Reform. The biggest forms of state assistance they now receive are emergency medical care & education for their kids, as far as I know.

[Hakluyt]

Randolph Carter,

Ha ha ha. 🙂

I’ve probably met more Americans in berets than Frenchmen. Now, the business about the French female scarf fetish is true. 🙂

joe,

The funny thing is that Grey Poupon isn’t a French company.

I tend to only buy either Maille or Delouis Fils mustard.

I only buy

[Jeff is Angry]

After seeing the women in france, I too would be making alot of babies if I lived there.

By the way you should never type anything about France if Hakluyt is posting on the thread, you are bound to get schooled.

[Alla]

yeah, i didn’t know. my mistake

[dhex]

unrelated:

how do you say “cheese eating surrender monkeys” in french?

[Dynamist]

I think that this prohibition, like most prohibitions on peaceful behavior, creates problems of violence and racketeering (and in this case, toilet paper in people’s yards) that are much worse than the problem they purport to solve

I do not regard trespass as a peaceful behaviour. The impoverished invaders from the south are seen as peaceful because there’s lax enforcement USA’s property rights.

If Saddam had surrendered, we wouldn’t have invaded but merely established temporary residence in Iraq as undocumented aliens.

[shecky]

Does anyone consider that these guys may be a completely different breed of right wing paramilitaries?

What ever happened to those 90s nutcases, anyway? Will we have to wait for the next Democrat in the Oval Office to hear from the likes of them again?

[Alla]

I don’t think those that want to get jobs are really going to be unpeaceful–they’re not so much invading and planning a takeover.

If they actually intrude on someone’s property, that’s really an issue of enforcing property rights not illegal immigration.

[Kari]

Attn: Right Wingers

Government is now totally awesome in every possible way. Adjust flackery accordingly.

Not exactly. Most of the anti-immigration righties are pretty angry at Bush — they see him as lax on or complicit with illegal immigration. I suspect that at least some of the Minutemen think they’re seizing power from the government (albeit because they consider the government’s enforcement and/or laws too soft).

[shecky]

I do not regard trespass as a peaceful behaviour. The impoverished invaders from the south are seen as peaceful because there’s lax enforcement USA’s property rights.

Trespassing is isn’t really trespassing when we all demand the services provided by said trespasser.

[Ayatollah Usoe]

What happened to those ’90s nutcases? We’re the ones who subscribe to reason?. I have it mailed to my compound every month.

[Dynamist]

shecky: If we need the services we must accomodate lawful entry. Unlawful entry is trespass.

Alla: Whether the title is held by government or privately, all of USA is owned by somebody, and USA’s rules on lawful entry apply to all the land.

I don’t think the minutemen are wackjobs (which might make me a wackjob) for defending against unlawful entry. It’s uncomfortable to agree with Lou Dobbs on something. The solution probably requires several interlocking aspects, to create an orderly and respectful flow of immigration. In the same way that I insist that trespass is not peaceful (although not necessarily violent), I prefer “undocumented alien” over “illegal immigrant”. Yet, as the law is written, undocumented aliens are criminals. The burden is on them to prove they’re standing on USA soil with USA permission.

[ralphus]

I’ve often wondered if the money to be made on a sensible guest worker program would surpass the money saved from illegal immigrant labor. You could still pay them significantly less than native-born workers while at the same time make a shitload off of services that cater to them. Bus and air service from the border to the US cites where they find work, housing, stores that import their favorite stuff from the homeland and any number of entrepreneurial ventures that someone smarter than me can think of. Not to mention how much revenue the gov would suck out in taxes on their now documented wages. Taxes that could help support the social services that the current undocumented population is putting under strain. I understand that many people are making a good living supplying services to the illegal community now, but I would think that if this economy moved from the shadows to the light there would only be more money to be had. Illegals would still be illegals, but guest workers would just be an easier to reach target market. Am I wrong?

[Kevin Carson]

Hakluyt,

Is it true that the French treat deodorant salesmen with the same disrespect we’d reserve for a Michael Jackson day care center?

[Trey]

I don’t see how the government can effectively control immigration into this country without dramatically increasing its control over those of us who are already here – control through the use of more secure ID, more internal checks, more power for law enforcement, more tracking and the like. I don’t want this at all.

Why is immigration a problem?
1) They take our governmental services
This is like blaming the crime associated with the war on drugs on the drugs.

2) They take our jobs…
Does anyone really believe this? One thing they do, by working outside of the system, is weaken government control of labor – OSHA, minimum wage, etc.

3) They weaken/poison our culture…
I see bilingual/bicultural education as one of the main reasons that this is happening. Besides, I like Mexican food, and I?m hoping the US adopts the siesta, so I don?t see this as a problem.

4) Illegal Immigrants are less law abiding/responsible?
Statistically, I think this might be true. So how do we address this?

[ralphus]

I doubt that Illegal immigrants are less law abiding/responsible. If anything they mind their Ps and Qs more than the native born due to the obvious consequences of drawing attention to themselves.

I for one welcome the influx of Hispanic culture. Strong families with strong work ethics and an entrepreneurial spirits are hardly a bad addition to a society.

I also think that the growth of the Hispanic minority is going to scuttle old arguments about race. It’s hard to tell a poor Hispanic worker that is sweating his ass off landscaping a housing project in Miami that the able-bodied men he sees loafing around there all day are being oppressed by the man. To him they’re just plain lazy.

[agentalbert]

Hey Ralphus, why don’t you tell a “noble savage” story now?

[Rikurzhen]

On average, illegals are a net tax burden (note net tax, not net economic). That’s the major problem: illegal immigration + current tax/spending structure = tax subsidy for agriculture and other industries. One solution would be to charge a fee for guest worker passes to offset the tax burden. Immigration could then become a taxation issue, and people found working w/o purchased passes could be fined or their employers fined. No?

[ralphus]

I’m also a big fan of the food, the music. (Except Tejano. Polka and Mariachi? Wha?) The women. Said women half nekkid on wild ass variety shows or selling twelve-packs at the drive-thru beer store near my office. The whole it’s OK to have a mistress thing. Cokes with real sugar and whacked out talk show panels featuring a midget, two transsexuals and a dog-face boy that make wish I understood more Spanish.

[matt]

Dynamist:

“I do not regard trespass as a peaceful behaviour.”

If they were tespassing on your property, you’d have a point.

“…USA’s property rights.”

Ambigous collectives don’t have rights, individuals do. (And of course the U.S. government violates these rights on a daily basis.)

[The Lonewacko Blog]

It’s good to see Reason back to the normal state of affairs: in effect supporting government corruption, the Mexican oligarchy, massive subsidies to corrupt corporations, and on and on. I’m sure they don’t mean to do those things, they just haven’t thought about this issue as deeply as I’m sure they could.

Here’s a couple of interesting links:

Texas Democrat welcomes militant Chicano group that promises “physical confrontation”. Apparently he clarified his support after the militant group spoke.

[ralphus]

Hey agentalbert, how about expanding on your comment?

If you mean to imply that by pointing out cultural traits I’ve observed while living in both Texas and Florida which have led me to believe that Hispanic culture will only serve to enhance US culture I’m engaging in a form of romanticist racism then you are a simple minded fuck.

[Dynamist]

matt: Corporations and governments have legal rights and legal standing. That’s different from human inalienable rights. As a citizen, I’m part owner of everything USA holds title to, and I would like my territory to be more secure.

Trey and ralphus put me on to the reason why Democrats and many Reasonoids should join jowly old Dobbs in calling for tighter borders: Most of the Mexicans and Central Americans are Catholics. To welcome these immigrants is tantamount to welcoming Jesus into your heart and acknowledging that abortion is closer to murder than to surgery. We can’t have that!

[ralphus]

Dynamist,

The Hispanic Catholic is far less worrying to me than the Anglo Baptist. Most Catholics I have known haven’t tended to be zealots. I doubt that many Hispanic immigrants are filling the ranks of Opus Dei.

[Jim Walsh]

It’s good to see Lonewacko back to the normal state of affairs, mounting his big white horse and lancing straw men…

[thoreau]

Is it “noble savage” to observe that our imports tend to do pretty well for themselves and for us as well?

[matt]

“As a citizen, I’m part owner of everything USA holds title to, and I would like my territory to be more secure.”

Well I’m also a citizen, Dynamist, and as “part owner” of everything as well I say let in whomever wants to come.

[John]

I wish everyone who rips on the Minutemen would go live on a ranch near the Mexican border for a while. The illegal immigrants do wonderful things like walk in people’s houses and demand food, a ride to town, ect.. There are roads in the Arizona, New Mexico deserts that the locals cannot drive at night because of the danger of the human trafficers who drive 100 mph down them running anyone in their way off the road. The bands of illegals come on people’s property, kill cattle, tear down fences, and leave garbage and human waste. If I lived there, I would probably be in prison right now for putting a night vision scope on a high powered rifle and shooting anyone who came on my property. To say that support of immigration means that anyone can come over the border anytime, regardles of laws and tresspass on private individual’s property and they are not allowed to do anything about it is downright bizzare and certainly not libertarian. Its very easy for elitsts assholes living in their nice neighborhoods in LA or San Fran to preach to the rest of the world about wonders of illegal immigration. It would be nice if they just once would have live with the consequences of their arguments.

[thoreau]

John-

I have the utmost sympathy for the people being affected by the black market in labor. My family has had a little bit of experience with the black market for drugs, and I can say unequivocally that the best way to undermine a black market is to bring the transactions into the open. Let’s pull the rug out from under the human traffickers by admitting into the US any non-violent person who goes to a checkpoint, pays a small fee for an investigation, and passes a background check against criminal and terrorist databases.

And let’s vigorously police the border to keep out anybody who needs to evade the background checks (i.e. violent people)

[mediageek]

What ever happened to those 90s nutcases, anyway?
Various explanations abound, but my personal belief is that most of them died of heart failure as a result of running through the woods while wearing size 52 BDU’s and a rucksack full of Ho-Ho’s.

Why anyone ever considered a bunch of overweight hilljacks playing army in the woods to be a legitimate threat to the federal government is beyond me.

[Dynamist]

Well, matt, then you’ll have to change the law.

[Dynamist]

On the surface, if we’re gonna have immigration law, we must enforce it. If somebody like matt wanted to allow immigrants without restriction, wouldn’t that person (or voting bloc) then properly have to take responsibility for whoever they allowed in? matt can have first crack at hiring the less-skilled labor, but he also must pick up the costs of a less-well-educated and poor subculture.

This might be getting closer to my underlying beef about unfettered immigration. It is as if my roommate invited all his buddies over and they cleaned out my icebox and pantry. That sucks. Even if they mowed the lawn and scrubbed the toilets, it was all done without my knowledge or consent.

[thoreau]

I think I miss the days when I felt a certain kinship with the crazies.

That means the medications are working ;->

[Nobody Important]

The President of the United States on May 5:

[snip]

I would like to say something to [those of you] who believe the greatest threat to America comes not from terrorists from … beyond our borders, but from our own government.

[snip]

I believe you have every right, indeed you have the responsibility, to question our government when you disagree with its policies. And I will do everything in my power to protect your right to do so.

But I also know there have been lawbreakers among those who espouse your philosophy.

[snip]

But the Weathermen of the radical left who resorted to violence in the 1960s were wrong. Today, the gang members who use life on the mean streets of America, as terrible as it is, to justify taking the law into their own hands and taking innocent life are wrong. The people who came to the United States to bomb the World Trade Center were wrong.

[snip]

How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on Earth live in tyranny.

[snip]

[T]here is nothing patriotic about hating your country, or pretending that you can love your country but despise your government. There is nothing heroic about turning your back on America, or ignoring your own responsibilities. If you want to preserve your own freedom, you must stand up for the freedom of others with whom you disagree. But you also must stand up for the rule of law. You cannot have one without the other.

[snip]

The President of the United States on June 1:

[snip]

But do not condemn people who work for the government. That’s the kind of mentality that produced Oklahoma City.

[snip]

And I think the most important thing we can do to make your father safer is to have everybody in this room, whatever their political party or their view, stand up and say, it is wrong to condemn people who are out there doing there job and wrong to threaten them. And when you hear somebody doing it, you ought to stand up and double up your fist and stick it in the sky and shout them down. That is wrong. It is wrong.

[snip]

The President of the United States on December 30:

We recognized, once again, that we can’t love our country and hate our government.

Remember when disagreeing with the president was hate speech that made one a terrorist sympathizer, or even an “unidicted co-conspirator?” It was 10 years ago. The Left — including the mainstream media — just couldn’t lap this stuff up fast enough.

Nowadays, equating the president with Hitler, and law enforcement with jack-booted thugs, is Patriotic Dissent.

[matt]

“…if we’re gonna have immigration law, we must enforce it.”

Why? That’s like saying, “if we’re gonna have drug laws, we must enforce them.” I think we’d all be better off if fewer laws were not enforced.

“It is as if my roommate invited all his buddies over and they cleaned out my icebox and pantry. That sucks. Even if they mowed the lawn and scrubbed the toilets, it was all done without my knowledge or consent.”

That’s silly. Unless they are specifically on your property without your consent, that argument is meaningless. The entire U.S. is not your or anyone else’s property.

Ever heard the phrase “two wrongs don’t make a right” dynamist? Just because the government wrongs you or me by taking our money without consent, this is no excuse to advocate government aggression against immigrants. Our beef is with the government not the immigrants.

[matt]

Oops, should read:

“I think we’d all be better off if more laws were not enforced.”

[Seamus]

I trust that all those people calling for open borders are also in favor of a Palestinian right to return.

[Other John]

But if everyone in Mexico moves to the US, who will be left to administer the public execution that Mexico’s corrupt, incompentent government officials so richly deserve?

Carry a US flag into a US – Mexico soccer game, then come post here about how we should not have immigration laws…….

Yes, I know.

Raiders’ fans don’t boo our national anthem, they will be Men About It and just punch you in the face instead of throwing bodily fluids at your back and Raiders’ fans don’t chant “Osama, Osama.”

[John]

Other John,

You make a great point. I don’t think we do Mexico any favors by having an open border. First, we take many of their people who are hard working and have initiative. Think about it, if immigration is so good for this country, how can it not be bad for other countries to loose their so many hard working young people? Second, it acts as a safety valve. Look at Vincente Fox sometime. He doesn’t look anything like your typical Mexican immigrant. That is because he is part of the caucausion, Mexican elite. If they couldn’t send their disgruntled masses north, the corrupt elites of Mexico would be alive for about six months at best. Because they have the safety valve of sending everyone who doens’t like their horrible system North, they are able to stay in power. I don’t see how we are doing the Mexicans any favors by allowing that to happen. What is so bad with shutting off the border, letting Mexico blow and seeing jerks like Fox hanging from lampposts? Maybe then, the Mexicans can get the government they deserve and we would all be a lot better off in the end.

[joe]

Boo fuckity hoo, soccer fans are MEAN!

Christ, when did our patriotic manly men become such a bunch of pussies?

[dhex]

so what’s this shit about soccer?

[Dynamist]

matt: You agreed that all USA citizens are part owners, then tell me nobody owns all of USA. Pick a side. Federal laws apply to all USA territory, no matter who holds the title. Get your Mexican buddies out of my icebox or I’m calling ICE.

Unenforced laws are an invitation to corruption and abuse. Look to the selectively-enforced sodomy laws in the south. When the sherrif decides he doesn’t like your Badnarik yard sign, he can dust off the old books and bust you for not having a proper hitching post or some such archaic regulation. Even if your Mexican buddies are only on your land, and I’m having a bad day, I can rat you out to the ICE as long as the law is on the books.

The world doesn’t improve by you pretending the bad stuff doesn’t exist. Work to repeal our drug laws, and argue the package of immigration control that you favor. And, please, take responsibility for the costs you create.

[Kevin Carson]

Nobody Important,

Back when Clinton was saying that bullshit, some lonely voices on the Left like Alexander Cockburn were saying that their side should speak out against Janet Reno’s police state. The mainstream Left, by embracing the Clintonoids, screwed itself. Starting with Seattle, federal law enforcement’s top “anti-terrorist” priority shifted from constitutionalists and patriots to the anti-globalization movement. Some of the fastest-rising stars in Fatherland Security today are people like John Timoney who’ve had a hard-on against the anti-globalization movement for years.

Cockburn was right. Left-libertarians should have stood up against the anti-“militia” hysteria when they had the chance. Now it’s on the Right that USA PATRIOT opponents like Bob Barr are the loney voices. If civil libertarians of both Left and Right had formed a principled coalition against Auntie Jen, it might have held up against Crisco John.

[ralphus]

I have no problem with what the Minute Men are doing. Not that I would wan to hang with any of the reactionary mouth breathers I’ve seen on TV. But, as long as they don’t break any laws, it’s within their right to sit in a lawn chair with binoculars and a walkie-talkie. The fact that they’re showing up a government agency actually warms my cold libertarian heart. However, I do think that groups like them wouldn’t be around if there was a sensible guest worker policy. Illegals would still come, but in a much more manageable numbers for even our keystone immigration cops.

[matt]

“You agreed that all USA citizens are part owners, then tell me nobody owns all of USA. Pick a side.”

That was a sarcastic reply to your silly assertion that you’re part owner of everything, dynamist. (But I realize that I didn’t make it clear, however…my bad.)

“Unenforced laws are an invitation to corruption and abuse. Look to the selectively-enforced sodomy laws in the south.”

Would you rather they be strictly enforced? Repealing the law is the best solution, but uneforcement is the next best solution.

“And, please, take responsibility for the costs you create.”

So people coming to work here from a foreign country are a “cost?” Doesn’t make sense to me.

You seem to be arguing for the “net-tax consumer” standard. Holding to this principle, wouldn’t this entail rounding up all “net-tax consumers” and kicking them out of America?

[Dynamist]

matt: My silly assertion is the law of the land. We the People are the government, and the lunkheads we elect pass laws which apply to public and private property alike. If you do not accept that we’ll have to go deeper into political and legal fundamentals.

Unenforcement is not a solution. It’s ignoring the problem. It may help you and I sneak through life, but I’m looking for something more than hoping Sheriff Possum doesn’t develop a grudge against me. Again, we probably have to hash out some fundamentals.

People coming to work have costs as well as benefits. Until your immigration package becomes law, you’re shifting the cost side unto me without my consent. I may in the final measure be getting a net benefit, but without my consent you’re coercing me apparently “for my own good”. I already have enough parents. If your case is good, you’ll get it passed without forcing me to trust your judgement.

If I was arguing a “net tax consumer” angle, one of the first distinctions I would draw is between citizens and non-citizens. Why would I allow non-citizen net tax consumers to hang around raiding my icebox?