best song to listen to on a Walkman.
I was referring to the dancing moves. :P
I saw Chicago at the Colorado State Fair one year. They were having a great time, dancing all over the stage doing "the Bump" with one another. I had to half cover my eyes

Mad skills!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwc0AW67C...

well, in those pockets they have their own crime rings, including human traffiking-but my point is you never hear of them complain about illegal mexicans taking their jobs. Just as in manufacturing changes in this country, each group of low skilled labor worker must be willing to move on in order to thrive. a ditch digger making a career of it will eventually wear out physically or be replaced with a machine. one must adapt in order to flourish

You could never convince them about that, even if the Democrats took up the battle-cry.

Which Asians are we talking about? China's workers are told that the complaint box is "right over there...under the hangman's noose". Our Asians seem to have a pretty solid value system that preaches "the flexible reed doesn't break with the breeze." I have nothing but respect for the Far Eastern culture, and marvel as to how industrious they seem to be.

I have seen the New York and San Francisco china-towns, and even though they remain tightly knit Chinese enclaves, and make little effort to assimilate our culture, they don't seem to make any demands for us to accommodate them other than to give them our patron-ship. My guess is that they have an underground monetary system that the IRS would love to 'tap'!

absolutely it's what the dems are doing. If unskilled laborers complained about minimum wage laws, they have everything to gain. Again, why is it that the Asians are not complaining?!! !!

I agree with you, except for the opening statement "In a free world"...what does that even mean?

But don't get lost in the minutia. Stay with me on the issue.

Firstly: blacks can do what the illegals do, and work off of the clock. That sidesteps the hope that they will take a political stand against a law that is engraved in the liberal Blarney Stone. It shouldn't make any difference to the employer, since either worker is outside of the 'system' in regards to the law. Many local blacks do yard service for 'cash only'. Maybe there is a stiffer penalty for paying Americans under the table, over paying non-citizens off the books...I don't know, since I never did this while in business.

The crux of the matter is that illegal workers are flooding the market place, and Americans are taking the 'hit'. Opening the borders to even more of this doesn't sound appealing to me. Changing the wage laws does, but you might as well try to lasso the moon.

I don't "blame" the illegals, but I blame the government that has the laws in place to reduce the impact, but are inclined to 'look the other way'. I am also convinced that the Democrat embracing of these workers is not a sympathetic reaction, but a political ploy to 'stuff' the ballot boxes.

in a free world, this is irrelevant. I f we did not have a minimum wage, and the welfare state, a free person may hire whomever they wish. To force them to hire someone else is abridgement of freedom. everyone is better off, when we do not abridge that freedom. People and countries do not own jobs. The hirer "owns" the job. If blacks in your community are affected as you say, they should demand the end of the welfare state, argue against minimum wage. The hirer may be doing something against the law, however, they are minimizing overhead which is good for their business. The govt has placed so many restrictions and cost on businesses, they are willing often to take the risk of hiring an illegal. We cannot place the blame on the illegal, as well we cannot pity the low skilled US worker. We also need businesses to thrive, as long as no property rights are violated. Illegal hiring does not necessarily violate property rights.

Why thank you! :-). I figured I had to put in something decent, I've been out of the loop for so long...

It is funny that you use slavery as your rebuttal...since America's black slaves could very well be our first non-documented immigrants.

They fit your argument, since they definitely worked on the 'cheap', and added to the "free market" economy of the South. According to you, it is natural market forces that made poor white cotton pickers refuse to wear leg irons and work for daily food rations. But that is their loss, if they weren't flexible enough to bow to the market reality.... Then they were dumb enough to don butternut gray, and charge into blazing fire to support the right to lose their jobs to imported labor.

As for traditions: check out what is happening in too many European countries. There are virtual areas of Paris that the French will not even go into, regardless of the reason. The same is happening in England, where Sharia law is being applied, and the English are caving in. All of this was brought about by a relaxed immigration policy, and it won't be long before Europe will no longer be what we all read about in the history books. Political correctness gone amuck.

Unrestricted immigration sounds good with the Marsala wine being sipped at the liberal dinner party, but that is not a healthy (or productive) doctrine. It can be a nation killer....

"... from whence they came". I LOVE that phrase. I said it the other day at school and got a weird look from an adult. I was referring to students coming in from recess...not illegals lol... Good line Nonmooch!

It was a cause for being returned to your home country if you arrived on US soil with an illness. Too bad. My grandparents came in 1904 from Italy. LEGALLY. My Aunts and Uncles were FORBIDDEN from speaking in Italian. They were now American citizens, and thus should assimilate to their new country. They would have NEVER taken any assistance as it meant you were too lazy to work. My dad is the baby of 15 children and the only one born in a hospital or attend college. He is a Korean War veteran, and holds dear the freedoms we have enjoyed. But he is disgusted by the influx of immigrants who expect us to conform to their ways, when it should be the other way around. Just as I would expect to do if I were to take up residence in another country. I would honor their laws and abide by them, or suffer the consequences OF MY ACTIONS.

Illegal immigrants are exactly that. No xenophobia implied. They are here illegally and thus breaking our laws. Ship em back from whence they came. Wherever on he globe that may be.

I disagree that the government needs to protect its native work base as I disagree that its the governments job to interfere with a free market.If a business wants to hire cheap work and get cheap results fine. If someone is willing to do a job for a lower price than I am I better lower my price or find my niche in the market.I'm not going to ask Uncle Sam to kick my competition out of the country because they weren't born here.

I agree that it would take a financial burden off of the community, however that isn't a very good reason to deny people access to the country. You could also redistribute more wealth from the rich to reduce the burden on the majority of a community. That doesn't make it morally right. The government shouldn't be paying for these things, and that's where you should target your restrictions.

As for preserving a nation's traditions I fully disagree. Many governments in the past had horrible traditions. Slavery could have been called a tradition. If you have a tradition of restricting someones rights, the fact that it's traditional does not make it right. Also I didn't get your reference and I don't know who to ask about this lol.

I think maybe our disagreement is over whether being allowed to decide where you want to live is a right or not, so you could try to express why a human should be disallowed from using his best judgement concerning his own life and no others.

No absurdity here...but a ton of reality.

In Florida almost all the roofers are now Mexican, while at one time they were local blacks making a decent living. The work crew will have one English speaking foreman, out of sheer necessity. On the last commercial job site that my business was supplying, the entire roof crew of over almost 30 workers were undocumented, save for their 'boss'. ICE rolled onsite on day, and the entire crew jumped almost 20 feet to the ground and scattered in all points of the compass. As a side-note, I got to know their foreman pretty well, and he told me that his crew were all living in one rented home and cooking their own meals communally...thus the majority of their wages were being wired back to their families South of the border. I can't answer to the tax situation, since he always changed the subject.

Every single job now being performed by an unregistered could be filled by one of our distressed black, or white, work force...no getting around that one.

The old comeback that they are "doing jobs that Americans will not do" is pure spin: these jobs were being done at one time by, guess who, Americans. Just look to the Okies from the Dust Bowl to see if Americans would stoop to work in the fields.

Simple Math 101: take a job away by hiring an illegal, and that is one less job for an American in the same economic sphere.

yes, Mr. Succinct
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R2RsP43r...
start at 2:00 in. huh. watching this video reminds me of when I last saw Chicago perform

That is the argument a lot of black leaders make... If the law of supply and demand works then any large influx of unskilled laborers should drive down the wages for the unskilled. Their ethnicity isn't really the issue is it? The level of skills and the number of jobs are the critical metrics…

Maphesdus,
Your definition of invasion is too narrow.
in•va•sion [in-vey-zhuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
2.
the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
3.
entrance as if to take possession or overrun: the annual invasion of the resort by tourists.
4.
infringement by intrusion.
Origin:
1400–50; late Middle English < Late Latin invāsīon- (stem of invāsiō ), equivalent to invās ( us ), past participle of invādere + -iōn- -ion; see invade

Related forms
pre•in•va•sion, adjective
re•in•va•sion, noun
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2013.

Call it what you like, but it is de facto invasion because it is not documented or authorized. In fact the Mexican government’s lack of enforcement on their side of the border and net benefit of American dollars provides motive for an implicit approval/encouragement of invasion. If they do not check in legally there race or nationality is not germane to the term illegal. The argument is a red herring trying to conflate the illegal act with the person themselves. We should call them criminals instead of illegal aliens, since we would call anyone breaking a law a criminal. This cannot be labeled as inherently racist, if it is applied to all races. Xenophobic could be applied, however it requires proof of intent and denies any legitimate reason for immigration control, or any room for those who want limited responsible immigration. Nativist may be applied but that also denies any legitimate arguments for control. The fact that we had more open immigration while the country was less developed is irrelevant. That is not an answer to the problems faced by a more populated nation in an age of increased security needs thanks to informal armies of terrorists wanting to do ill, and a government already bankrupt from handing out more than it receives. If only ten percent of those coming in illegally are doing so for the welfare, considering the numbers it is a significant problem. Certainly the welfare state carrot should be removed, and our policies are the magnet, but that is no excuse to break the law. Those who are citizens taking advantage of the welfare state are no different except that they didn’t break the law getting here. There is a legal method of immigration and it should be followed until it is legally changed.
Respectfully,
O.A.

"Ask the black community about what effect the onslaught of Mexican workers can have...."
I do not follow. The influx of Mexican workers to the US does not affect job opportunities for the blacks any more than US Latinos, whites, Asians, el salvadorans, etc. Time was, immigrants came into the country with the idea of starting a business, growing said business and hiring......US citizens. The Asians are still doing that. I rarely hear complaints about the Asians to the complaints about Mexicans. Why is that?? Really, I do not want to distinguish immigrants into groups any more than I want to say a certain group is at a disadvantage in the US. I will say this. Productive people produce. If they are not allowed to produce or they are hindered by regulations, stripped of freedoms, taxes raised on-they will emigrate eventually. The blacks are disadvantaged by immigrants coming into the country? absurd.

There are many reasons for a country to control immigration, and to pass laws to that effect.

One reason could be to protect it's native work base from being 'forced' out of the market by sheer volume of anxious new workers. Ask the black community about what effect the onslaught of Mexican workers can have....

Another reason is to take pressure off of the community financial resources that new 'citizens' will necessarily demand and/or have to have. Ask California, and Texas, about that.... Texas actually has to educate Mexican children who commute across the border daily.

Yet another reason is to try to preserve a nation's values and traditions. The era of immigration assimilation has 'flown the coop' in many regards, especially in the Southwestern states. I don't have to tell you who to ask about this....

There are numerous more reasons, but I think that you get the point.

To argue that there are no reasons to control the influx of non-natives out of some Pollyanna image of a totally beautiful society with the perfect government silently 'watching' our back is just that: a wonderful fairy tale.

Due to our immigration policies ... or, lack thereof ... we're seeing new diseases and a reoccurrence of diseases that were previously eradicated in this country.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2...

It seems to me, that limiting and/or screening the people who enter this country is prudent, wise, and moral.

I like they way you put that, very succinct. I'm going to use this Thank you.

well, phobias are not good things. I was just trying to be provocative. I do believe people are naturally reacting to a situation where their own country tells them, immigrants (with the exception of Asians!) have priority or seniority or status over them. We just appear to be xenophobic because we have a government that is not color blind.

your last statement is correct. Ours is fast diminishing in its status as prosperous, opportunity-offering, economic freedom loving nation. We are at the tipping point of not able to reclaim in a generation. One's grandparents, great grandparents immigrated because we were the fastest growing, wealthiest, freest nation on Earth, and due to our Constitution created the environment for that to happen the fastest in History. Our policies on affirmative action make it advantageous for immigrants to get high paying government jobs, scholarships to schools, hiring, etc. all of this at the cost of white Americans. When they cross the border they are eligible within 90 days for govt assistance. no wonder people are xenophobic.
Now whites are emigrating to economically freer countries for opportunities and lower costs of living.

agreed

lol. I am out of the country, so the link does not go through for me.-it's not the one I posted earlier in the day is it?
on xenophobia: if a certain culture is based on changing our Constitution to align with its culture of less freedoms, religious justification for laws, reduction in private properties-I'd say a little xenophobia is not that bad a thing