Illegal Immigrant Paradox

[Zkribbler]

It seems to me that the two parties have eached lined-up on the wrong side of this issue.

Pro-business laissez-faire Republicans should be backing illegal immigrantion. Fewer restrictions on immigration and immigrants would shrink the size of government, give more flexibility to the free enterprise system, drive down labor costs and increase profits.

Pro-labor pro-regulation Democrats should be opposing illegal immigration. Illegals are bought in by corporate employers the circumvent minumum wages set out in statutes and in union contracts. The result is the dreaded "race to the bottom." Union jobs are lost to competitors using illegals and the standard of living for union workers is dragged downwards.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of illegal immigration, why is each side seeming to work against its own self interest??

[Lancer]

We really should call somebody, get this straightened out.

[chequita guevara]

Because making mass immigration of low wage workers illegal depresses their wages, and forces them to work without benefits. These both benefit business against labor.

So while immigration lowers wages, illegal immigration lowers wages more. Legal immigrants are easier to unionize as well.

[BlackCat]

Nah, it's more simple - the repugnants want to protect the pure american bloodline and the dymocrites wants a lot of illegal immigrants that they can legalise so the get a chance to win the next election.

[chequita guevara]

Cute.

[Jaguar]

I'm a pro-business laissez-faire conservative and I am wholeheartedly for immigration. My stance is consistent.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Cute.

Yep, american politics isn't that difficult to explain

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Nah, it's more simple - the repugnants want to protect the pure american bloodline and the dymocrites wants a lot of illegal immigrants that they can legalise so the get a chance to win the next election.

Okay, racism vs. naked opportunism. That I can understand.

[chequita guevara]

Just ignore the fact that only citizens can vote, and illegal immigrants can't become citizens.

[Zkribbler]

Black Cat mentioned "legalizing" them. I presume that's a referencen to amnesty or at least a "path to citizenship." So, I don't think Cat ignored the fact that illegals can't vote...at least legally.

[Pekka]

First of all, don't expect parties to line up on any side just beucase it 'fits their agenda'. I know they are stupid little goats, but come on, you're really overestimating them here. Don't expect anything. Observe, think, and when you are on top of things, you might as well just laugh because if you can't put humor on it, you'll be depressed and die alone. I suggest you laugh instead.

Now the other thing, it's not a paradox either.

Get your stuff straight Zkribbler, you're one of the good guys!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Black Cat mentioned "legalizing" them.

Yes, but his answer isn't the case. The GOP wasn't prepared for the nativist backlash that a simple pandering position would have indicated.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Nah, it's more simple - the repugnants want to protect the pure american bloodline and the dymocrites wants a lot of illegal immigrants that they can legalise so the get a chance to win the next election.

What exactly is a pure American bloodline? I'm sort of curious

[Japher]

this dude

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Sprayber


What exactly is a pure American bloodline? I'm sort of curious

Maybe I should have added a

Or is it that close to the truth ?