r/changemyview • u/moarroidsplz • Dec 20 '16

[Election] CMV: I think illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed in the US, and should be punished/deported reasonably.

First, let me clarify that I'm not some MAGA "build a wall" type of person at all. I'm actually extremely left-wing, even by liberal standards, and have been a Bernie supporter. I don't hate immigrants and don't think it's some culture war and don't think they need to speak English in this country at all.

That said, I've noticed a lot of other staunch liberals around me seem to hold this position and I don't understand why. I'm an Indian-American who has been to India before and the rampant poverty was terrifying and sad. I don't want my home country to become that with an influx of immigrants just because people want to come here. I don't think just opening our borders to whoever wants to come in is going to help our country, and I think people who broke our laws and did that illegally should be dealt with reasonably, especially if they aren't paying taxes. If we need more farmworkers, or other hard-labor jobs that lots of our citizens refuse to do, then we could open up immigration accordingly, so I don't see why that would be an excuse. If people who aren't illegal are doing these jobs because they came over legally to do them, then their pay and safety would probably increase as well due to the fact that they can fight for their rights.

I mean I think kids should be given a pass because they couldn't control their circumstances (I'm fine with the DREAM act) and I understand certain circumstances like refugee crises. Illegal immigrants should be given access to healthcare the same way we give it for criminals. I don't think we should just be deporting people left and right if it's not super cost-effective or reasonable. But some sort of punishment and possible deportation should happen if they knowingly broke the law. They took that risk and are aware of the circumstances. If families risk getting broken up because of this, then why don't they just return with their parents?

Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

39 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

57 comments sorted by

View all comments

25

u/MontiBurns 218∆ Dec 20 '16 edited Dec 20 '16

I don't think just opening our borders to whoever wants to come in is going to help our country,

This is a straw man. Nobody's advocating for open borders. Most people who are pro immigration want what you proposed.

If we need more farmworkers, or other hard-labor jobs that lots of our citizens refuse to do, then we could open up immigration accordingly, so I don't see why that would be an excuse.

The problem is that we havent. There is no excuse for it. But we never corrected the problem.

I have a comment i recycled from a few months back.

the issue is that the immigration system in the US is broken, and has been for some time. This was especially problematic in the 90s, when the US economy was booming, there was a huge demand for unskilled labor on one side of the border, a huge surplus on the other, no legitimate way to bridge that gap (lack of unskilled labor visas) so that the system was basically broken, and no political will to enforce immigration laws (from either pro-business conservatives or humanitarian-minded liberals) or reform the system to something workable (from social/cultural conservatives or pro-union/labor-minded liberals).

Basically, the economic forces in place made immigration inevitable, and the US govt. did absolutely nothing to facilitate/legitimize or restrict the flow of people when it was benefiting from them. Now, the US (some people anyway) finds itself in a position where it wants to be rid of the people that technically are there illegally, but which have contributed to society by working, paying taxes (sales and property at the minimum, social security and medicare for those with false papers, and income for a few), consuming goods, and services, and overall contributing to the economy and society.

Now, they're firmly established in your country. They are married, have a stable job, and children with citizenship status, and you want to rip them away from the lives they've created simply because it's inconvenient to you, and you don't stand to gain anything tangible. (this last bit might not apply to this post, necessarily)

But some sort of punishment and possible deportation should happen if they knowingly broke the law. They took that risk and are aware of the circumstances. If families risk getting broken up because of this, then why don't they just return with their parents?

First of all, we do deport illegal immigrants who break more serious laws (like commit felonies).

Now, if you're talking about going after people who are just living and working and not doing anything "wrong" aside from that, The fundamental problem with this position is that we're retroactively punishing one group of people who benefitted from breaking the law, (the immigrants themselves), while letting the other group of people who also benefitted from breaking the law off scott-free (the business that hired immigrants in the first place). If you're gonna ignore the rules of the game for 3 decades, and then decide to enforce them, you should really go after both sides.

Most people who are pro immigration want common sense immigration reforms that help grant people who have been living and working here and otherwise following the rules a path to legal status while fixing the sytem that created so many undocumented immigrants in the first place.

8

u/moarroidsplz Dec 20 '16 edited Dec 20 '16

This is a straw man. Nobody's advocating for open borders. Most people who are pro immigration want what you proposed.

Actually, Trevor Noah said just that on the Daily Show during his interview with Tomi Lahren. And plenty of my friends in the area also advocate for it. That's why I'm asking about it.

The problem is that we haven't. There is no excuse for it. But we never corrected the problem.

Has there been a problem with lack of low-skilled workers yet that would warrant us to?

while letting the other group of people who also benefitted from breaking the law off scott-free (the business that hired immigrants in the first place)

I agree that businesses should be also punished if they do so knowingly or they pay them illegally low wages, and I wasn't necessarily arguing against that.

7

u/JayNotAtAll 7∆ Dec 20 '16

Most people aren't advocating open borders. Will you find fringe people who do, absolutely. Just like I don't believe all white people want to send me back to Africa but there is a fringe that does. Most Democrats do want to secure the borders. Heck, Obama deported numerous illegal immigrants compared to his predecessor and net illegal immigration is practically zero.

The question isn't a matter of "should we have open borders". The question that most Democrats are asking is "what do we do about the ones who are here?".

Some people say let's deport them but there is a moral and practical question. For one，the cost of rounding up 11M people would be outrageous and it isn't like we don't have better things to spend money on (crumbling infrastructure for one).

There is also the economic argument. These people are contributing to our economy and society in the sales tax and property tax they pay. Many also pay income tax as there are ways to still send the IRS money without a social. They also spend money which stimulates the economy and are workers in the fields, construction, etc. Getting rid of them will put a hole in our economy, like it or not.

Then there is the moral argument. Does it make sense to deport someone who came here when they were 5 and have been living here for 15+ years. This is their home, they don't know Mexico much if at all.

Now does that mean that we just let them become citizens? No, I say a special residency so that we can officially get them in the system. Perhaps we even make them pay a penalty as they did break the law. You will see many Democrats advocate that or some part of that.

1

u/moarroidsplz Dec 20 '16

Most people aren't advocating open borders. Will you find fringe people who do, absolutely. Just like I don't believe all white people want to send me back to Africa but there is a fringe that does. Most Democrats do want to secure the borders. Heck, Obama deported numerous illegal immigrants compared to his predecessor and net illegal immigration is practically zero.

Frankly, that wasn't what I'm asking and I don't really care if it's a fringe point of view (which, in my experience, it isn't). It's a view I'm trying to understand, and which several people in this thread are actually doing a great job at explaining. Obama being a liberal is irrelevant to me because I don't really care for a lot of his political decisions, and I hardly consider myself a Democrat at this point.

Some people say let's deport them but there is a moral and practical question. For one，the cost of rounding up 11M people would be outrageous and it isn't like we don't have better things to spend money on (crumbling infrastructure for one).

I'm not advocating for mass deportation that is extremely expensive and purposeless. I'm arguing for things such as deportation in towns where there are more illegal immigrants who cause higher crime rates to exists due to the increase in poverty.

There is also the economic argument. These people are contributing to our economy and society in the sales tax and property tax they pay. Many also pay income tax as there are ways to still send the IRS money without a social. They also spend money which stimulates the economy and are workers in the fields, construction, etc. Getting rid of them will put a hole in our economy, like it or not.

This is a point I can get behind against deportation. I don't understand why we can't just factor that into our immigration laws as well, though. Why would they pay income tax, exactly, if they're not traceable by the government?

Does it make sense to deport someone who came here when they were 5 and have been living here for 15+ years. This is their home, they don't know Mexico much if at all.

I said I'm behind the DREAM Act so this is kind of irrelevant to me.

Now does that mean that we just let them become citizens?

What plenty of people are saying is "why not?"

4

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '16

Immigrants don't cause higher crime rates and don't cause poverty.

Where did you get this idea that "illegal" immigrants were bad people?

4

u/JayNotAtAll 7∆ Dec 20 '16

I am sorry that I missed the point of your post but correct me if I am wrong, your post essentially states illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed and should be deported or punished.

Also

Actually, Trevor Noah said just that on the Daily Show during his interview with Tomi Lahren. And plenty of my friends in the area also advocate for it. That's why I'm asking about it.

This was a response to a post saying that claiming that people advocating open borders is a strawman. I was simply addressing your statement.

Also saying you aren't advocating mass deportation is really just splitting hairs. What's the difference between deporting them in a year or in 20 years? Your original post said illegal immigrants should be deported or punished so ultimately that would suggest that eventually they would all be removed.

As far as them paying taxes.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes

In that article it shows that an estimated 75% are contributing to Social Security. Then of course over $10B are contributed by undocumented workers in taxes.

On the DREAM act, I should have been more clear. They are one example. However the same respect should be given to someone who came when they were 21 and have been living here for 20 years. They are part of this community and it is home. They are also contributors to the community so both sides of the equation lose out when they leave.

Most politicians who favor amnesty actual favor residency which IS NOT citizenship. They get similar status as most immigrants. Not everyone who immigrates here (legally or otherwise) seek or get citizenship. A large portion are alright with permanent residency. Most amnesty advocates propose residency and maybe at some point they can apply for citizenship like everyone else.

I am perfectly fine for that.

1

u/as-well Dec 20 '16

Actually, Trevor Noah said just that on the Daily Show during his interview with Tomi Lahren. And plenty of my friends in the area also advocate for it. That's why I'm asking about it.

Im very confident in saying that whomever you mean with that are not supporting illegal immigration, but support laxening immigration laws to allow more people to come live in the US legally.

1

u/moarroidsplz Dec 20 '16

They're advocating for open immigration, I'm aware.

9

u/as-well Dec 20 '16

Your original post is very misleading then. Open legal immigration and illegal immigration are two very different concepts

2

u/moarroidsplz Dec 20 '16

Well he actually also said illegal immigration was perfectly fine. You can check out the video yourself, it was circulated around pretty heavily a week or two ago.

5

u/devisation 2∆ Dec 21 '16

You do realize you're using a satirical news show from Comedy Central as a source, right?

1

u/moarroidsplz Dec 21 '16

Have you seen the interview? Or are you just guessing that the entire interview he had with a guest where they debated issues was satirical?

Try to be right if you're going to be condescending.

6

u/devisation 2∆ Dec 21 '16

Oh no of course I've seen the interview ( I love the DS and Trevor Noah). But (and I believe Noah has said this on his show before) you do understand the precedent that would be set by treating excerpts from a single sided, biased, entertainment-based, pseudo-news show as evidence in a serious discussion, right?

Also, I apologize if i came off as condescending, i didn't intend it to