Illegals: Should Assets and Profits Be Seized?

[kjm]

can not ignore the attraction caused by social welfare bennies and anchor baby status. To praise hardworking criminal immigrants and ignore the slimeballs that are also criminal immigrants is to look at the world through distorted glasses. Criminal aliens are expensive.

Excellent point Waitone. I cannot argue this. I don't know if they're getting welfare here in Texas because everywhere I've lived in this state, they were terrified to talk to anybody from the government. I think California has a problem with welfare for immigrants, but then they kinda deserve the government they've got.

I am not for assisting these people in breaking the law anymore than I am for giving welfare to the millions here who don't want to do the jobs that get filled by these people and end up on the dole. All welfare programs distort the economy and market and make us less competitive in the world economy with powers like India and China.

If you want to solve the welfare problem- please do! I have no problem with doing completely away with all forms of welfare including AFDC, WIC, Unemployment insurance (unless you paid for it), and Social Security.

Waitone- you have just provided an excellent and COGENT counter-arguement without resorting to name-calling! Thanks for the example to others on this board who seem to have difficulty doing the same.

 

[cuate]

Illegals

Fifty years ago in far West Texas we used illegals (Wets) for ranch labor. The reason being that ranch labor consisted of much more manual labor than playing cowboy and riding horses which the grown Anglo job hunters seemed to think was ranch work. There was fence building, ditch digging for water lines, windmills to look after, cattle to doctor and feed, loco weed to dig up and burn to eradicate, cattle guards to put in and endless hard work.

These men walked the 90 miles from Chihuahua in about three days time, always at night to avoid the Border Patrol.
Only a few were bad hombres in those days, most were very trustworthy and one, "Yayo" stayed about ten or twelve years, first as a Wet and later as a legal Bracero.

They were not bringing their families and they were not bringing in dope and they could run like an antelope when they spied the Immigration. Today is a different world and the illegal invaders of today are much different.

 

[Waitone]

Looks like we are already seizing assets--taxpayer assets. Every point of this article shows Bush and Co. and not the least interested in solving the problem.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/223556_immig10.html?source=rss

U.S. pays for care of illegal aliens
Treatment money for border states

By ROBERT PEAR
THE NEW YORK TIMES

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration said yesterday that it would start paying hospitals and doctors for providing emergency care to illegal immigrants.

The money, totaling $1 billion, will be available for services provided from today through September 2008. Congress provided the money as part of the 2003 law that expanded Medicare to cover prescription drugs, but the new payments have nothing to do with the Medicare program.

Members of Congress from border states had sought the money. They said treatment of illegal immigrants imposed a huge financial burden on many hospitals, which are required to provide emergency care to patients who need it, regardless of their immigration status or ability to pay.

Under the new program, hospitals are supposed to ask patients for documents to substantiate payment claims. But Dr. Mark McClellan, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said a hospital should not directly ask a patient "if he or she is an undocumented alien."

Instead, he said, hospitals can try to establish a patient's status by analyzing the answers to "indirect questions": Is the person eligible for Medicaid? (If so, payment is generally not available under the new program.) Has the person reported a foreign place of birth? Does the person have a border-crossing card like those issued to Mexican citizens? Does the person have a foreign passport, a foreign driver's license or a foreign identification card?

The Bush administration abandoned a proposal that would have required many hospitals to ask patients if they were U.S. citizens or legal immigrants.

"In no circumstances are hospitals required to ask people about their citizenship status," McClellan said yesterday.

Hospital executives and immigrant rights groups had said such questions would deter illegal immigrants from seeking care and could lead to serious public health problems by increasing the spread of communicable diseases.

Cecilia Munoz, a vice president of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino civil rights group, said the new requirements were an improvement over the original proposal but would still discourage some immigrants from seeking treatment.

"Hospitals will have to ask confusing, highly technical questions about immigration documents," Munoz said. "That will create a perception in the Latino community that you have to show your papers in order to get emergency care. That's a misperception, but it may be enough to deter some people from seeking care."

The new program is run by the Department of Health and Human Services. McClellan said the department would not provide information about illegal immigrants to law enforcement officials for use in "routine civil immigration proceedings." But in rare cases, he said, the information may be used in criminal investigations.

The largest allocations this fiscal year are going to California, which will receive $70.8 million; Texas, $46 million; Arizona, $45 million; New York, $12.3 million; Illinois, $10.3 million; Florida, $8.7 million; and New Mexico, $5.1 million.

 

[kjm]

I don't mind paying their hospital bills nor paying for the education of their kids, but we need to bill Mexico for it. If we spend $10K for medical care on a Honduran immigrant, then Honduras needs to either pay up by any of a number of means.

Mexicans own huge assets here in the states, and when they don't pay, seize THEIR assets. Their oil gas reserves are enormous. They can pay us back and that is fair in my book.

The problem with the solutions of fences and INS agents is that it makes a Mexican problem an American one. If you want to solve the problem, you have to address the problem. If Mexico won't assist us with keeping their people gainfully employed, then bill them. We send Mexico about $4 Billion a year in US AID. We can deduct the cost of caring for their citizens from that amount. If it doesn't cover it, then tarriffs tend to get the attention of governments.

I love the free market, but part of that is putting the actual costs on the goods. If taxpayers here are subsidizing illegals, then that needs to stop. If you subsidize behavior you get more of it. If you don't subsidize it, then you get less of it.

 

[Fred Hansen]

I don't mind paying their hospital bills nor paying for the education of their kids, but we need to bill Mexico for it. If we spend $10K for medical care on a Honduran immigrant, then Honduras needs to either pay up by any of a number of means.

Please tell me you are joking.

 

[Unique 5.7]

Nice posts, Waitone.
Funny how some people are bothered by my proposal to seize the assets of the parties responsible for hiring illegal aliens.
I like how you expressed that it is taxpayer assets that are being seized and used to subsidize care for the illegals.

 

[kjm]

Actually I am not joking. I believe that if you put the Mexican government on the spot and force them to pay for their citizen's problems here, then you would quickly see a need for the INS diminish considerably. I also think the Mexican Army would be standing on the border and stopping immigrants from crossing.

Mexico isn't a real democracy. It is an aristocratic cleptocracy where the super rich take as much as they can. In their system it doesn't matter much about human beings if you can make a profit from graft or trade. If you cut into their profits, they- being good businessmen will likely solve their problem which in the Mexican custom is to put the Army on the border. It is how they've dealt with Central American immigrants into Mexico for decades.

Right now we're losing and Mexico is winning. If you want to level the playing fields, you have to turn the problem into a Mexican one, not have our taxpayers continue to subsidize a Mexican problem. We might as well be writing Vicente Fox and company checks if you want to continue to do what has not and will not ever work.

You cannot turn away a man from a hospital who is bleeding or injured. I wouldn't stand for it. I likewise won't turn his children away from the schoolhouse door. I will however happily send his government a bill and demand payment. We have quite coercive means of exacting payment and it doesn't involve guns and Armies. We are still the world's biggest market and most powerful economy.

 

[Waitone]

The problem is two fold. First, by taking criminal aliens from Mexico we are letting the pressure off Mexican society. Second, the US government is tangled up in its own underwear. I submit the following article as the perfect picture of disfunctional government.

http://www.vdare.com/mann/050404_inspector.htm

April 04, 2005
Coyotes Change Tactics—Co-opt Border Patrol

By Juan Mann

[Also by Juan Mann:
bullet Whistleblower reports on ICE, CBP and everything else.

bullet Comments from Texans and Tejanos.]

The evidence is in. Case closed. There can be no denying that illegal aliens entering the United States know more about the ins and outs of the federal immigration bureaucracy—and how to manipulate it – than the average American.

An e-mail report I received recently from a self-identified Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspector on the Mexican border says it all. The Agent reports a significant change of tactics by the smugglers of non-Mexican illegals.

As the reader is a federal employee, I provide the following disclaimer:

“The opinions expressed on this page do not in any way represent the official position of the DOJ, EOIR, BIA, DHS, CBP, ICE, USCIS or any other branch of the United States government ... but maybe they will someday.”

Subject: Please help the USA
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005

“I hope you might want to know how things are going on the Texas-Mexico Border. Things are really bad. Everyday it gets more ridiculous.

“As an Immigration Inspector I talk to people all day long. In one day I had 2 Hondurans, 1 Guatemalan and 2 El Salvadorans all come up to me and tell me they had just crossed the river illegally. They all have just one request: “¿Me puedes dar un permiso para entrar a los Estados Unidos?” [Can you can give me a permit to enter the United States?]"

None have visas, they usually don’t even have a passport. But, they all have the address of a friend or family member that is already in the U.S. illegally that they want to stay with. Most already know where they are going to work and how much they will be paid. As these people have already crossed illegally and are entering the Port of Entry from the north, I am obligated to call Border Patrol.

"I’m sure you all know what Border Patrol is obligated to do—they must parole the illegal alien into the U.S., if they are from countries Other Than Mexico [OTMs], and give them a date to appear in court for their Deportation hearing.We also know that the vast majority, some estimate 85%+ never show up to court. Would you?"

Are you ready for this? The Coyotes no longer simply drop the illegals off on the other side of the river. For a few extra dollars they take them right to the fence of the Border Patrol station. When they arrive there they give the B.P. Agents a courtesy call from their cell phone and let them know how many people are waiting for them outside…OTMs have to be given a Parole into the U.S. They are most times even given transportation to the bus station."

(Because Mexico is a contiguous country, Mexican illegals can be more easily deported. Rather than face detention, they usually voluntarily go back—and try again.)

My correspondent continues:

“Several people, including the illegal aliens, have told me how they cross the river. There is a little boat that makes several crossings a day. I suspect he has a regular schedule, to ferry people across. Several have even told me, “Yo cruce en la lanchita amarilla.” [I cross in the yellow launch].

“Please help us. We are here on the border fighting a losing battle. It will not get better until people in the U.S. know the truth.

“Please write more about what is going on. Most U.S. citizens don’t realize how many illegal aliens there are in our country. They don’t understand what is happening to our country.”

This brazen change in tactics proves that illegal alien smugglers and their lawyer allies in the Treason Lobby are now coaching their charges well. They know that by reporting to the Border Patrol, the illegals get into the system and can apply for employment authorization – which is always granted pending their hearing. If they choose to show up at their hearing, they have an excellent chance of stalling deportation indefinitely. They may even get legal status.

The root cause of this madness is how the federal government goes about deporting illegal aliens – above all, the U.S. Immigration Court system of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) within the Department of Justice.

When it comes to what’s wrong with the deportation system in the United States, all roads lead to the EOIR.

I’ve been writing about the EOIR for the past three years. I’ve called for the ‘deportation through litigation’ system to be abolished. Author Michelle Malkin agreed in the conclusion of her book, Invasion.

A delay-ridden EOIR Immigration Court hearing system (with access to a smorgasbord of litigation in the federal district courts and circuit courts of appeal) for the deportation of every single illegal alien who manages to set foot on American soil – coupled with the catch-and-release non-detention policies of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division – is the recipe for an open border.

The Treason Lobby has known this for years. Immigration detention centers on the Mexican border are little more than new Ellis Islands. Their only apparent function is to release illegal aliens for the supposed purpose of appearing somewhere else for an EOIR Immigration Court hearing someday.

Fortunately, the miracle of the internet has allowed patriotic VDARE.com readers and other whistleblowers to communicate and get the message out to the public . . . safely and confidentially [E-mail Juan Mann].

My correspondent needn't worry. I’ll keep writing about the federal immigration litigation bureaucracy and all of its fallout on America. In addition to my weekly column here on VDARE.com, I have now joined the ranks of the group immigration blog hosted by Michelle Malkin.

The reality of America’s open border will be known outside of the ranks of illegal aliens, their smugglers and allies in the Treason Lobby, as well as the few patriotic Americans who are trying to do something about it.

 

[Fred Hansen]

I suppose we could spend even more money on Mexico by sending them bills that some .gov flunky promulgates, but if you listen carefully when the wind is out of the south you can hear the uproarious laughter. Little things like NAFTA and other international treaties will prevent mean ol' El Norte from ever seeing a dime. If you thought we could use trade sanctions in order to extract payment, you might want to think again.

Sometimes I wonder why we even bother to have a country anymore... a few of us still want one, and the rest just want to give it away so they can have their slave laborers. Makes me want to :barf:

 

[kjm]

Gee- NAFTA was signed in 1993 IIRC. The Dow was at what? Maybe 6,000 points? Now we're riding above 10K?

What about our GDP? I think it has had similar increases in size.

What about our unemployment rates? Similar improvements?

What about new housing construction- the main economic indicator of how the average joe is doing? Looks pretty good with last month having more new housing starts than there's been since the post WWII boom.

Yep- NAFTA really did awful things to this economy. I hope CAFTA will be as much a disaster as NAFTA was for my kid's sakes!

I know people talk of "comparative advantage" but I doubt many here would understand the principle though.

 

[Trip20]

I have met some of the most decent, honorable and honest people I have known. Last week I said goodbye to a dear friend who was here illegally from Mexico working as an architect. He coached our kid's soccer team and provided one of the best examples of human decency those kids are likely to run across for a long time.

Your comment is so ridiculous I shouldn't have to point it out but I will:

Your dear friend, who is so decent, honorable and honest -- could have done the decent, honorable, and honest thing -- which is to go through the proper channels to enter this country in a lawful manner.

I'm sure this is just one hell of a guy your speaking of... however the rules are in place for a reason - and to completely disregard the laws of "my" country, I take as a slap in the face.

When it's convenient for you to overlook the law... you do so. That's just freaking wonderful.

Deported.

 

[Waitone]

Careful, there are those on this forum who can talk not only about comparative advantage but can also discuss absolute advantage, the difference between the two, and implications for national economics if one is confused for the other.

You are somewhat new on TFL. Stick around long enough and you'll be shocked at who you can converse with.

 

[Trip20]

I thought I was being careful.

My opinion would be the same if I had a join date of 03-19-2000.

 

[kjm]

Oddly enough- the guy never saw the INS. He left because of a lack of skills to succeed in upper levels of the American Economy. He was here on a tourist visa which makes it illegal to work. Yep- he broke the law. Something that I am sure that those who take it as a slap in the face have NEVER done !

I am sure that you never drive faster than the speed limit and respect all laws concerning firearms and such. I am sure that you condemn those who partook of alcohol during prohibition since the law (nomatter how silly) was indeed the law.

I prefer well-thought out laws that recognize that you cannot legislate the laws of economics. When you attempt to do so- you will fail every time and so far in the history of human kind- it has failed.

Take countries like Indonesia where you get the death penalty for possessing even small amounts of drugs. People still do and they still get the death penalty. There is a demand and hence there will be a supply.

Pass all the laws you want and pay all the taxes you can afford, but doing what we've always done will continue to get us what we've always got. So far on this thread I am seeing a bunch of people who are advocating that we simply do more of what hasn't worked in lieu of what hasn't been tried and can be considerably cheaper. Since the old stuff doesn't work, how about trying something new?

 

[Trip20]

Look kjm... this is a controversial issue... and I'm sure the discussion can get heated. I tried to imply - along with my point - that I'm sure this fella was a wonderful person (i.e. coached the soccer team, good role model for the kids...etc).

It's not a personal attack on him, nor you. But rather your rationalization of doing wrong which is further perpetrated by the following statements:

I am sure that you never drive faster than the speed limit and respect all laws concerning firearms and such. I am sure that you condemn those who partook of alcohol during prohibition since the law (nomatter how silly) was indeed the law.

I generally do not speed, but I have, yes - guilty as charged.

I do however follow all the firearm laws and do my best to stay on top as they change and I regularly check my DNR website for all other firearm and general DNR-issue regulations..etc. If I break the law it's out of ignorance and it's my fault. I should be held accountable.

I was not alive when prohibition was enacted so I have no opinion on the subject other than you shouldn't break the law period.

With all due respect - what a silly group of comparisons to the issue at hand.

You justify breaking the law by pointing out what you feel are other "common" situations where you assume people break the law, and it’s OK to do so.

That's ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as if I were to assuming you’re a speed-demon, gun-crime-advocating alcoholic based on what you appear to view as normal and allowed. I don't think this of you...not that you would care if I did.

I prefer well-thought out laws

I was unaware that we are obligated to follow the laws we prefer in lieu of all of them... However, I to see how certain laws are silly. But I do not have the right to break these laws.

 

[kjm]

Trip,
I am not implying that because people do it, it makes it OK. There is no end to that rationalization and that would get us in pretty bad shape in short order.

The point was twofold. First, the guy was a decent person. He was breaking the law, but the law never deported him, economics did. He became subject to the same laws of economics that brings unskilled labor north of the border. It just so happens that he couldn't even work for a fraction of the cost of an architect here.

Secondly, I have no affection for laws that are morally repugnant. While immigration laws are not in that class, many laws have been and are. Jim Crow comes to mind as well as the Fugitive Slave Act in 1830. A more recent example would be the NFA and GCA '68 as a repugnant law that violates more moral standards than it helps. In my opinion, I believe a morally repugnant law requires non-cooperation of good men if circumstances dictate.

The Nazis did nothing illegal in Germany during the 1930's and 1940's and lots of good law abiding Germans did what the law required. Didn't make it right.

The class of laws we are discussing here (Immigration) is well within Congress' prerogotive to manipulate. Unfortunately for everybody involved but the lawyers, the laws are the result of populist hogwash and propaganda and the result of a poorly written, poorly thought out law is that it dilutes everybody's respect for the law in general.

If you pass a law and it cannot be enforced, and is predictably going to be ignored and actively violated, then all laws- even the good ones suffer. In my perfect world, we would do away with all minimum wage laws, immigration would be easy but citizenship VERY difficult, and the advantage American Citizens would have would be the same that they have now. 12 years of education paid for gratis by the taxpayer that simply blows most immigrants away. Sure- there'd be a lot less gringos digging post holes and picking onions in the Rio Grande Valley, but there'd maybe be more incentive to take the blessings of liberty bestowed upon us by our ascendants, and make the most of the advantage in education that we have.

 

[Jammer Six]

KJM, well said!

I'm behind you all the way!

We get stronger when an immigrant crosses the border.

Generally speaking, the weak, lame and lazy stay behind, and we get the ones that are looking for a better life, and willing to go the distance to get it.

The distance includes danger, risk, leaving everything behind, and scrubbing toilets when you get here.

It pleases me to see it put into words, I've been floundering around, looking for exactly those word, KJM: "...imigration would be easy, but citizenship very difficult."

If legal immigration were easy, the main difference would be that we'd be collecting taxes from the immigrants that are now here illegally, and we'd be getting even stronger.

Exactly!

 

[Trip20]

It is against the law to carry a concealed weapon in the state of WI and oh boy do I get hot just thinking about it.

I would REALLY like the right to do so, but I can't. I think this law is silly. I think it is constitutionally repugnant. I pisses me off to no end. But each day I abide by it. (it was hard for me not to use a lot of 4-letter words just now )

I can just move, yet I love where I live in every other facet.

In my opinion constitutionally repugnant law require the responsible citizen to do the right thing by working through their elected officials to change what they do not like. This applies to moral repugnancy as well.

To condone breaking the law (regardless of the perceived severity of said law) is wrong.

Why not illegally make your weapon full auto? What's the difference? No one is going to get hurt. What the gub’ment don't know won't hurt'em! See how ridiculous that rationalization is?

I wish every illegal was as wonderful as this fella you know/knew. But the reality is different. Their younger population (guessing 17-30) fill our prisons. Take that to the bank - literally. How do you like paying for them when they break our "more serious" laws?

Maybe it's a case of the "bad illegals" wrecking it for the "good illegals". Call it what you wish. But they must be stopped IMO.

 

[kjm]

Well- as far as the illegals filling the prisons, in my experience as a jailer back in 1994, I recall only seeing one illegal alien being brought in out of hundreds of prisoners. Oddly enough, he hadn't committed any serious crime, but when queried by the police (he was sleeping in his truck alongside the road), he gave a false name to avoid deportation and it turned out the name he used was a wanted felon (a legal if not native-born felon at that), and so the cops brought him in until he confessed to using a false name (that we knew anyway once his prints came back as the wrong guy). We could have charged him with execution of document by deception which is a state jail felony, but we let him go as he was a threat to nobody and the INS wasn't interested in driving all the way out to our county for one guy who apparently was gainfully employed and staying out of trouble.

As far as carrying concealed, perhaps Texas is different than other states. People do it here all the time both legally and illegally and nobody seems to care much unless you're a real turd to a cop. I've had the Department of Public Safety troopers give me an excuse when they saw my pistol sitting beside me. The situation was I had been pulled over for having a headlight out, and when he saw the pistol and he saw that I had both hands out the window where he could see them and my DL and insurance papers ready, he smiled and said: "been huntin lately huh?" (travelling to and from sporting activities in Texas is a legal reason to be armed, among many other things).

When cops don't enforce the law because it is repugnant to them, and when citizens don't abide by the law, the law is utterly meaningless IMO. The constitution does not have asteriks, and it is quite void of exceptions that I know of and the only qualifiers are that some things are permissible so long as the accused has been afforded due process.

I do not have a license to carry concealed and I break that law quite frequently. You cannot license a right because in my opinion, a right is a gift from God, not from government. Hence, there's a law that I disregard every day!

The saying I heard from many LEO's was "If you're white and polite, it's alright." That attitude in itself and the history of gun control laws being used only to disarm minorities to make lynchings safer for the mob makes the law repugnant in itself.

 

[KSFreeman]

Whatever one's opinion of RICO is, it is a tool available to federal law enforcement. Spiking a few heads at the corporations hiring the coyotes and bringing up the illegal aliens would be a much more effective way to combat illegal immigration rather than having a bunch of Walter Mittys playing dress up and patrol about the Arizona desert.

While businesses do need the labor that illegal aliens provide as Americans are far too fat and lazy to do what needs to be done, turning the USAs loose on corporate America would get Bush the guest worker program that we need signed into law in a hurry!