I learned lots of attractive stuff in your website chiefly it’s statement of opinion .

Within the lots of info on your articles, I consider I’m not the only person having each of the happiness here!

Dont stop learning . the excellent working.

Thanks giving significantly !! Possess a good day !!

Si no estoy de acuerdo contigo, me vas a llamar perjudicado. Y no estoy de acuerdo contigo. Prefiero fronteras controladas. Los Mexicanos si controlan sus propias fronteras. ¿Son perjudicados ellos?

¿Me entendés?

On the one hand, the existence of any substantial undocumented population is a vitiating force against any self-conception of the U.S. as a “nation of laws.” While that sounds like a straightforward “law and order” stance, how pleasant an existence is it really for those undocumented individuals, forever worried about their status, the police, being found out? Not to mention, for many folks, being consigned to dead-end jobs. So—on the other hand—a more “regulated” atmosphere of immigration has the possibility of serving the interests of those living here illegally—or those who, some day, would do so.

And we can go on: on the one hand, an amnesty program rewards those have broken the law. On the other hand, some sort of humane solution regarding the 12 million folks here without papers must be pursued.

On the one hand, the issue of illegal immigration is a serious one, and frustration is merited. On the other hand, much of the frustration Americans voice is tinged with unmistakable shades of bigotry.

On the one hand, as long as we retain national borders, they ought to mean something. On the other hand, we have barely hesitated in dissolving borders of transnational business expansion, financial accounts, and so forth. Does it make sense to any longer limit the mobility of the labor force—whose efforts, after all, power the economy that today’s titans have so readily manipulated across global boundaries?

Arizona’s new law, rather than acknowledging the “on the one hand/on the other hand”s, has laid down a single forceful hand on the side of draconian suspicion and round-em-up fervor.

Indeed, the above questions—with their reflecting-mirrors complexity, their lack of resolution—can depress us. Or they can spur us to action. To resolutions that take account of the complications. We need immigration reform as comprehensive as the problems they would seek to address.

I am reminded, as I often am when it comes to politics, of Auden’s famous poem “September 1, 1939,” and his attempt to, “Beleaguered by the same/Negation and despair,/Show an affirming flame.” Let’s raise our voices. Let’s maintain hope in something better than the dehumanizing negation found in Arizona’s law, and the despair among so many of those who oppose it.

“College is mandatory for a majority of Americans. And damn few of them aspire to be manual, service or agricultural workers”

All due respect, but you obviously don’t run in the same crowds I do. I’m smack dab in the middle of the Midwest, and college is a pipe dream for a strong majority of both the middle and lower class here–same for whites, blacks, and Latinos. I’m talking both rural and urban populations. The cost of college is completely unreachable now for considerably more people than it was 10 or 20 years ago, and even for those who are able to obtain a more affordable community college education, they’re competing for fewer white collar jobs.

To put it simply: middle and lower-income folks in the Midwest aspire to whatever puts food on the table, and provides health care if you’re damn lucky (fewer each day). Custodial jobs, yardwork, entry level machine shops, grocery stores–every job you cite as an immigrant job in California (save for farms, which are either automated or pay illegally low wages) is performed by all walks of life here in the Midwest. A different ballgame here.

The irony is that I think that we have more than enough “border enforcement” and probably way too much. I believe that if we had an effective payrolling ID – and most of the “illegal” workforce that’s already here and could establish their employment and no serious criminal record I would put first in line with a green resident worker card and a “21st Century Social Security Card” (along with a path to citizenship that wasn’t unfair to people who were “legally” in line) – i.e. electronic, instantaneous workplace enforcement for any job that requires federal payrolling data – we could do away with any “iron curtain” crap on the border and let border agents focus on any activities by real criminals, not people intent on committing “Hard Work While Speaking Spanish.” Any jobs that are routinely conducted via cash payments – handyman, lawn work, baby sitters, bus boys, whatever else in the “gray” menial labor market – aren’t really of concern. Making payrolling dependent on proof of legal residence – using the same technology that banks and credit card companies put in nearly everyone’s pocket on a daily basis – would end 80% of the problem. And if the numbers were 20% of what they are, it wouldn’t actually be a problem. I also think that since immigration/naturalization is a federal policy, the federal government should allocate some payments to local social services and school systems, based on ratios of recent immigrants, to help with any additional costs that people in the process of assimilation might add. Not sure how the details would work, but it seems fair.