About Me

Name: Glen Albrethsen
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

The Geraldo solution

As it made the rounds of talk radio today, I thought I might add my two cents to this whole notion that we shouldn't demonize everyone who is here illegally.

Geraldo Rivera arguing that only reporting the bad things that undocumented aliens do creates intolerance and hatred towards them frustrates me. It frustrates me because the solution is not pointing out the positives about illegal immigration. The solution is to restore the positives of legal immigration, and that doesn't happen as long as anyone, regardless of their status, can reap the benefits.

What's interesting about this is, I would have less of an issue with it if it weren't the law. I could see some advantages to having an open border as long as I was as free to cross and go anywhere I pleased, too. If I didn't have to worry about passports and visas and how long I'm going to stay and declaring this or that and having that feeling in the back of my mind that if I overstayed my welcome I might spend the rest of my life rotting inside some foreign prison cell, it would be great.

I don't think it's the way anywhere else in the world. That's not to say there's not illegal immigration in other countries, but it just doesn't feel like a blind eye gets turned to it, either.

So, if it's not a big deal to just show up in the United States, get work, get benefits, fine. I guess I would still have some questions with how all that's supposed to work, but at least I wouldn't feel like it's wrong.

Believe me, I know the vast majority of those here in this country illegally are not terrorists, murderers, drug dealers or rapists. Most are hard working people with the idea of getting ahead in a country where it can happen. Something they feel is worth spending thousands of dollars and suffering untold hardships to get here, and then spending years and more suffering to pay that off because all they can do is get paid minimum wage jobs (or less) and live in fear of deportation or racism, or what have you.

But it's harder to feel sorry for someone when they've brought it upon themselves. So things back home aren't that great. How's it ever going to get better if all people do is flee it? There's only so much running you can do before you have to make a stand. Mexico is one of the richest country in terms of natural resources on this American continent. If it's government were not so corrupt and if it's people didn't feel so oppressed, feel like the law doesn't matter because no matter what you do you can't fight the power, they would be one of the wealthiest countries on earth. I believe that. However, people lose hope and instead of fighting it and living in poverty, they risk everything and come for the streets paved with gold.

Does that mean we should welcome them all with open arms?

Is it fair they should reap benefits and rights they did not help to create or truly help to maintain?

Much is made that the undocumented working class pays taxes and is a major consumer here. Because of that, they should reap the benefits of it. They should be rewarded. They should be admired for their industry rather than be accused of any wrongdoing.

Well, again, for me, the law is the law. And the lawbreaking doesn't stop there.

Entering this country illegally is only the first step.

The next is either finding an employer who requires no paperwork and pays, if they do pay their workers, under the table. These kinds of employers are getting harder and harder to find because fewer and fewer can get away with it. Not only would they be hiring workers illegally, there would be failure to pay payroll taxes, and if there's anything the government is good at, it's collecting what they feel is owed them.

So, that means illegals are being hired by reputable, taxpaying businesses.

How? Through the booming black market identification industry.

Can't work if you don't have social security numbers or alien resident cards. Since employers are fairly inept at detecting false identification, black market ID booms. Someone else's social security number gets reissued and someone's else's ID card does, too.

That's violation number two.

Violation number three is using that identification to obtain things. Work, car loans and insurance generally follow. If they're not doing it on their own, they have someone who's cosigning or helping them. A lot of transactions take place in cash. However, if someone is here illegally, they're not suppose to own a car or get a driver's license or car insurance or work.

So before anything "bad" happens, they've already violated a number of state and federal laws.

That's before a hit and run or car wreck. That's before a shooting or a stabbing. That's before a rape or drug deal.

Because they won't get health care through their employers (most don't even offer it), the undocumented don't have access to health care. They are the most likely to end up at the doctor's office when something catastrophic happens--broken bone, major illness, drug overdose, gunshot wound, what have you.

They're also the most likely to take their child to the emergency room for a severe cold that should have been treated earlier and would have had they been here legally and had access to proper care.

Those who are here illegally aren't suppose to own property. But they do. If they do, again, it was done with false identification or they had help through a family member or friend.

These kinds of things can affect the credit of others. I know. My wife has had a credit card end up on her credit report that she never applied for. It was not an error on the part of the credit card company or the credit bureau. Someone else in another state applied for a credit card with my wife's social security number.

Fortunately, we caught it and got it removed before the applicant defaulted or ran up a high credit card bill.

I believe stories like these are repeated multiple times a day.

I don't call that paranoia, hysteria or hatemongering. I call it facts.

I don't think you award bad behavior with positive incentives. I don't think you give amnesty to the majority of those who are here. If you want to be compassionate, you might consider some few exceptions. However, it should affect a very small percentage of the illegal population, not the majority.

I don't know what the easy answer is regarding children born here of illegal immigrants. The United States has never based the citizenship of an individual born here on the basis of the status of their parents. That would be like the sins of the parents going to the children and that's not a doctrine I espouse or believe in. Still, I know there are women who come here for the express purpose of having a child here because they know they can get care and because they're counting on leniency by anyone who might enforce the law. They're betting on the fact they will not be deported because the law will be compassionate and merciful.

So far, they've been winning the bet.

Some enforcing of existing immigration law is beginning to happen in some states, particularly those along the Mexican border. There are results from those laws being enforced. People who are not here illegally are going elsewhere--either another state where enforcement is still lax, or they are returning to their country of origin.

That without any kind of immigration reform.

I have said this before. If you take away the incentives, people will move on. If they can no longer obtain work, they will leave. If employers will spend a little more time checking on social security numbers and green cards, and not hiring those who have false ID, illegal immigration will go down.

Personally, I think there are jobs illegal immigrants do that Americans would do, especially teenagers and single adults. I know there are youth running around wanting something to do. They're thinking of fun and entertainment, but what they really need and have ever shrinking opportunities for because of illegal immigration is work. We have people on welfare that would benefit from a lower wage job while they acquire skills and education to get them off welfare. Whatever other gaps there might be can be filled by legal immigrants who have been competing with the illegal immigrants, and if there's still more jobs to be filled, then I suppose a guest worker program would be in order. I'd like to see just how many jobs are left over before that though, as not all of the 12-20 million illegal immigrants currently residing in this country are all gainfully employed.

I don't think anyone needs to be encouraged to break the law. Shedding positive light on accomplishments of those who shouldn't be here won't make things better. It will only embolden others to do the same thing.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Looking at the Fair Tax--Part 2

I ended my first post on this subject without drawing any conclusions on the Fair Tax, so I'll do that here.


Is the Fair Tax a better way to go then our current system?


Perhaps the better question would be, is it worth a try? I would have to say yes.


Trying it would be the only way to find out if it indeed does all what its proponents say it will. That's a major overhaul to bring millions of people on line with, but of the alternative tax system proposals to date, it goes the farthest in eradicating everything that is wrong with the current tax system. Anything that takes 60,000 pages to explain is sorely and woefully awry.


The vast majority of states in the union have their own sales tax. Piggybacking onto those systems would seem to be appropriate. Enforcement would seem to be easier than what it is now, where you have millions who can potentially accidentally or purposefully withhold incorrect amounts of taxes, not file returns, and spend all kinds of taxpayer money and their own time getting it corrected.


Placing the tax on retail goods and services makes more sense in a free enterprise system then taxing someone's wages or assets. It would seem to encourage more consumption then less, which would seem to be good for the economy as well as good for the government. The more the economy grows, the chances of their being more consumers with more money to spend increases. Even if they do get money to spend via a prebate, even the poorest among us get an opportunity to contribute.


It will put more of the tax burden on those who are the wealthiest. It has that as a selling point on the homepage of fairtax.org.


The wealthiest among us are the ones who have the most capital to do things. They also tend to consume more. Where we might be fortunate to have one home, they might own two or more, and ones which are more expensive. They will have other toys and gadgets, employ others to make their lives easier, etc.


What if they decided to consume less? Because they can, what would happen if they were to take themselves off the grid--revert to their own means of generating energy to power their own homes and businesses? What if they started dealing exclusively in second hand yachts and homes?


In fact, what if the entire nation emphasized buying more used things then new things?


Well, it couldn't exclusively do that. The manufacturing of new items would not come to a screeching halt, but it could conceivably slow the new product business. It wouldn't all go away because eventually used things break down and would need to be replaced. Repair shops might make a comeback.


However, we've been trained since our infancy now to consume. Most of us living don't remember the depression. While there's been periods of bumps along the way, the United States has not experienced the likes of a decade long depression. We've become accustomed to our luxuries. Many of them we would call necessities.


Personally, I'm not going to feel bad if the federal government has to suddenly start downsizing because not enough revenue is coming in.


If this Fair Tax did do all that it says it would, then we wouldn't be able to borrow from China any more because we'd be competing more aggressively with them, and putting more of their factories and companies out of business in the process, because corporations would return to the US rather than shipping overseas.


I think the economy could thrive quite well on a second hand industry. While it's outgrown it's current model, eBay has been doing pretty well for itself, and so have places like Craigslist.


What I would wonder more about is if this went the other way. I'm not an environmentalist or a conservationist, but as a realist, there is a realization that there's a finite amount of resources. You either need to renew them quicker, or you need to consume at a lesser degree than what they would naturally renew, assuming they do.


We're already accused of being a consumer culture. We're already derided for being the most wasteful. Great strides have been made over the course of the last half century to work on pollution standards, and smaller footprints for all kinds of projects. The technology and know how is there, or being put into place. However, if consumption was unleashed on even greater scale than it is right now, and we all bought into it, at some point, as the population gets larger and human expansion continues, at some point, whether it be 10 years down the road or several centuries, you do come to the end of the road.


Most likely, that's too much to read into this. Rarely does anything have such transcending effect on a nation. Of course, that might have been what people thought when the income tax amendment was ratified, or when social security and medicare were mandated.


If the highest this Fair Tax can go is 24%--if it's actually written into law as the ceiling--and if a concerted effort will still be made to shrink the size of the federal government, not just grow it, then I can see this as being the best thing that could ever happen to us. Having the cost of living decreasing while our wages potentially increase, along with our savings and our investments, would all seem to be a good thing. The amount needed to run government could go down because fewer and fewer people would rely on social security and medicare. Less people would be on welfare. And, according the website, this would also discourage illegal immigration!


As I said at the top of this blog, it's hard to tell just what drastic effects this might have on us. While there may be negatives, they don't seem to outweigh the positives. Government, business and consumer would all have to do their part.


I think it's worth a try.

 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »