Comments on Pro Libertate: Fencing Us In, Not Keeping "Them" Out

kishnevi,i have to disagree with you. yes, the we...

2006-10-11T23:26:00.000-06:00

kishnevi,

i have to disagree with you. yes, the welfare state has to go, but open borders is bad juju. you can't just sit back and say, "hey! how are you enjoying the game thus far?!" as they come acorss. doesn't work. you never know who will come in. is a fence a solution? yes and no. with a neighbor like mexico? heck yeah! does it need to be like the maginot line? no. can it be simple? yes. the border needs patrolling first of all, but before you do that the incentives need to go away. but so long as americans feed from the nipple of welfare, every other "unfortunate people" is gonna want to come here and suck from the same tit. well, eventually, the milk will dry up.

it is not the role of the american govt, or its people, to provide welfare to those who come here. i cannot help why things are so bad elsewhere, but as for america, our house is not in order, so we need to take care of our own first...not with welfare, either. there is enough money in private hands (while taxes remain slightly below 50+%) to help the needy in our country. and to those who refuse to work and would rather thump somebody over their head to earn their living. well, they can die off. "if they won't work, they won't eat". darwinism. Jesus said that we would always have the poor amongst us. helping the poor is one thing....helping the lazy is another. let the lazy die off.

again, our govt has no business sending money abroad, or inviting others in, in order to sap the wealth from the citizenry. furthermore, the folks coming here ILLEGALLY are bringing all of their crime, their diseases, their language, and their customs with them. from what i'm seeing, they are not trying to assimliate. send them home i say. i'm getting sick and tired of the press 2 for spanish crap. don't want to assimilate? go home.

in the end, if folks want to come here legally, like i believe you suggested in the end, then go for it. but right now, i think immigration ought to be stopped indefintely until the mess we have now is cleaned up. kick the illegals out. and i could care less if the baby is still dragging on the ground by umbilical cord.

think of it this way. today a child was born to someone. nice and cute baby. all innocent looking...now. what you didn't know was that this child may kill you 20 years from now (or someone you know). it's a possibility. you reap what you sow. our problem, as a people, and especially as americans, is that we never...EVER, figure in, or think about the second and third order effects of our actions. what we allow today will ruin us tomorrow.

and my last parting volley...

I'd shoot the bastards as they come across. 3000+ a day? jeesh. and i should feel sorry for them?

In the long term, the only solution is open border...

2006-10-11T22:50:00.000-06:00

In the long term, the only solution is open borders without a welfare state. As long as they can get higher paying jobs here in the US, foreigners will come here. And if they can't get here legally, they will do so legally.

We can work to improve the standard of living throughout Latin America (and worldwide, or immigrants would simply come from Africa and Asia like they now do from Latin America); we can open the borders and let the labor market balance it out (basically, let anyone without a criminal/jihadi background come in as long they have a job waiting for them, and without any claim to welfare programs); or we can impoverish America so it is no longer a better place to live than Latin America. Any other "solution" is a hoax; economics ensures that.

This may mean a general lowering of wages and a lower standard of living (no free hospitals, etc.) for Americans in general. But is living in a police state (whose policies are ensuring a general lowering of the standard of living regardless) better?

all,i think it was on the jbs webpage, or wnd, how...

2006-10-11T18:40:00.000-06:00

all,

i think it was on the jbs webpage, or wnd, how eisenhower fixed the problem back in the 50s. the article said he only used about 1100 agents if i recall correctly.......and he got nearly all the illegals out. the bottom line is that when corporations and governments merge, what they want supercedes what the people wants. i think it works like this.

--govts license corporations

--corporations make lots of money

--corporations with lots of money use govt to put other corporations out of business

--govt prosecutes corporations when a) it's not getting its take and b) another corporation wants a monopoly

--corporations make lots of money, and politicians want some of that money...that's why they became politicians

--corporations pay more than the govt salaries

--politicians then favor certain corporations to line their pockets, and then when they "retire", go work for the corporation that they helped

so the govt officials now are getting, and will get, rich off of their inaction to stop immigration. and also, like will said, even doing a little is very profitable. people are sick.

on another note, this is all funny, though. (sadly funny). this whole thing. congress is broke, yet gives billions of dollars away to the states, and to other countries. yet, even the guy who assisted me in towing my truck today knew that fort bragg is having to cut back because of the budget constraints. i mean, it's even hitting us in the classroom! we're bringing in our own stuff that is normally supplied.

hmm. so let me get this straight...other countries are more important than are own?
oh well. it's only gonna get worse.

pragmatism vs. practicalitySorry, that should be i...

2006-10-11T16:53:00.000-06:00

pragmatism vs. practicality

Sorry, that should be impracticality or prudence might be more on the mark. ;)

Grigg, to cut to the chase, the admittedly difficu...

2006-10-11T16:48:00.000-06:00

Grigg, to cut to the chase, the admittedly difficult conundrum faced by the commoner folk in all these matters is pragmatism vs. practicality and Americans' demonstrated inability, unwillingness, or both, to walk the practical route. The pragmatic route is less painful. This is not to imply or say by any means that it's the right way, just that it's the way it is, unfortunately, in postmodern America. It's all a clear sign that the society at large has lost its moral compass; nevertheless, that's a topic for another time.

Too many folk fear losing their jobs, their homes, their families, or their entire livelihood to risk speaking up or out publicly, to risk taking overt action in some fashion, etc., etc. Your own recent episode is a stark reminder of precisely that reality.

Again, pragmatism is rarely if ever the right, especially the morally upstanding, way to live life in genral but materialism is king today. Ergo, any methodology or plan of action that would threaten folks' ability to quench their appetite for it, is taboo in their minds.

Also, I think somewhat along the lines of sologue in that I see/hear/read scores of folk continually who lay out in excruciating detail the folly and ominous signs and wonders of policies being orchestrated and/or executed, yet do not disclose or impart, likewise in that same excrutiating detail, their own solutions to the real problem(s) being discussed. And illegal immigration, unlike some of the other more mundane issues oft discussed, is a real problem. Left unchecked, not only does it have the propensity to bankrupt local and state governments, bankrupt and force hospitals to close down due to ER treatment mandates w/o compensation, increase the crime rate exponentially in some locales, but also will inevitably over time change the entire culture. And it won't be to one that continues to honor the Founding Fathers or the constitution, but something more akin to what they've been used to in their old homelands.

George Reisman touched upon this same subject but ...

2006-10-11T13:19:00.000-06:00

George Reisman touched upon this same subject but more briefly in his post Immigration Plus Welfare State Equals Police State back in April.

A question though: What is your proposed solution to the immigration problem, if boxing ourselves in isn't the trick? I would assume dismantling the welfare state and other institutions of perverse incentives are part of your plan, but what about the specifics of regulating immigration? By what criteria does the Fed decide who can and can't enter the country, and how many?

will,great piece. you point out how even well mea...

2006-10-11T05:45:00.000-06:00

will,

great piece. you point out how even well meaning people can be deceived into supporting an evil cause.

"in the end times, a spirit of deception will go out into the world, that if it were possible, even the very elect would be deceived."

(i forget where in the New Testament that came from.)

..and God don't ever lie.

This ia a wonderfully balanced treatment of the cu...

2006-10-11T03:31:00.000-06:00

This ia a wonderfully balanced treatment of the current threat on illegal immigration: Illegal immigration is bad, but the federal cure is worse -- and hypocritical. Oh, and the Republican immigration campaign just happens to coincide with their impeachment-prevention efforts to keep control of the House of Representatives.