Getting rid of illegal immigrants is hard. The reason for that is both stopping arrival and deportation are acts of force and therefore look bad on TV, attract activists protesting and make several officers disobeying based on conscience. Overcoming these problems have costs, making deportations and wall building expensive.
My suggestion is to ban non-critical positive trade to make the illegals leave on their own. What does it mean? The laws apply to citizens, companies and agencies, banning them from several actions and punish them for performing these. A non-complete list of actions:
Why does it work? Because while having no cable or no car or no rent flat or no credit card or no school alone is an inconvenience, having no cable and no car and no rent flat and no credit card and no school is unbearable, but still not life-threatening. The protesters can't march around with photos of people died because of this, while there will be surely people dying when they cross the wall or get shot by deportation forces when they aggressively and disorderly resist. Also, a couple hundred protesters can make serious mess, while the same amount of selfless helpers can sustain only a few immigrants. Any remaining protesters can be dismissed as "selfish" and suggested to just help the immigrants instead of protesting.
Sure, there will be black market, but it has extra costs which breaks the point of illegal immigration. A hiding druglord can afford a straw-man renting his flat and buying his car and paying for his cable, but a genuine illegal immigrant working as a dishwasher cannot. They will simply find their stay unprofitable and surrender at the immigration office where they get a free trip home.
This isn't my punditry, it's the de facto system in Hungary and it works like a charm. Those immigrants who get through our "wall" (actually multiple lines of barbed wire fences) get the message fast and keep moving to Germany. Sure, we have some wealthy fugitives hiding (it was quite funny/embarrassing that an Interpol/FBI wanted business criminal was living literally as the neighbor of the prime minister's weekend home), but we are free of the typical immigrant leeches.
My suggestion is to ban non-critical positive trade to make the illegals leave on their own. What does it mean? The laws apply to citizens, companies and agencies, banning them from several actions and punish them for performing these. A non-complete list of actions:
- giving illegals documents except for ones needed to return home. Illegals can't get driver's license or social security card or anything.
- employing illegals as workers. Of course it must be supported by some electronic system that helps them filter those with fake documents.
- admitting them to schools
- selling them homes
- renting them a flat
- selling them banking and financial products (credit card, loans, insurances, investments)
- selling them cable TV, internet services
- selling them a car
Why does it work? Because while having no cable or no car or no rent flat or no credit card or no school alone is an inconvenience, having no cable and no car and no rent flat and no credit card and no school is unbearable, but still not life-threatening. The protesters can't march around with photos of people died because of this, while there will be surely people dying when they cross the wall or get shot by deportation forces when they aggressively and disorderly resist. Also, a couple hundred protesters can make serious mess, while the same amount of selfless helpers can sustain only a few immigrants. Any remaining protesters can be dismissed as "selfish" and suggested to just help the immigrants instead of protesting.
Sure, there will be black market, but it has extra costs which breaks the point of illegal immigration. A hiding druglord can afford a straw-man renting his flat and buying his car and paying for his cable, but a genuine illegal immigrant working as a dishwasher cannot. They will simply find their stay unprofitable and surrender at the immigration office where they get a free trip home.
This isn't my punditry, it's the de facto system in Hungary and it works like a charm. Those immigrants who get through our "wall" (actually multiple lines of barbed wire fences) get the message fast and keep moving to Germany. Sure, we have some wealthy fugitives hiding (it was quite funny/embarrassing that an Interpol/FBI wanted business criminal was living literally as the neighbor of the prime minister's weekend home), but we are free of the typical immigrant leeches.
24 comments:
Please note that the issue we have in the UK IS NOT polish and syrian people coming here signing onto our welfare and taking up all our social housing (your leechs). Its the fact when they come over here they are unwelcome guests who refuse to assimilate. Wether its the arab/african/syrian men who attack our women, rape them, spit on them in the street and call them whores or the poles who refuse to speak english, learn english and just insult england and the english (your all lazy, your food is terrible, it just rains all the time, I miss poland).
For 50 year A core part of the "british identity" a great myth of our culture was how we alone stood against the nazis. We fought the great evil even after all the rest fell before them and we fought on because it was the right thing to do at terrible cost to ourselves. We lost our empire because of this! and we did it alongside the free poles the free czechs and the free french. Our great allies! there for us in our greatest hour of need! to be rememebered forever, their and our sacrifices and our brotherhood against the great evil. Or so goes our national myth. When the first poles came they were welcomed with open arms. After 5 years of living with their ignorance and racism we have come to understand that hitler actually had a point.
Its the legals who refuse to assimalate who are causing the issues. Not illegals who WANT to assimailate and forget the shitholes they came from. Many of the illegals I would take and many "legals" need to be deported. The only criteria should be will they live by our laws and our rules and learn to speak our language? if not they aren't welcome. When the west reforms its immigration to meet that criteria we will solve our whole problem.
Wait, so they are leeches because...they are forbidden to hold a legal job due to the laws?
Little doublethink there, don't you think? Better let them have jobs then, or you don't have a leg to stand on when you call them leeches.
@nightgerbil You left out the Welsh and Gallic speakers who also refuse to be assimilated into the little white England mindset. But logic is usually the first casualty of prejudice.
I don't like this shift in perspective and I am wondering where it comes from.
It builds upon the 'us versus them' mentality and does not address the root cause for leeches in general - both illegal and legal - and declares all illegals as leeches.
The worst is that it prohibits illegals from setting themselves apart from the real leeches by being productive and contributing to the (capitalistic) welfare.
I fear that instead of getting rid of the social transfers that support leeches, it will be a list like yours that will repeat history.
I fear it going from "I told you" to "I'm telling you".
Hungary is a terrible example in this case, as even the Hungarians who are somewhat mobile are leaving the country in masses. The 55% tax on wages, lowest minimal wage in EU and 27% VAT combined has the effect that no sane immigrant will stay in the country as they can easily get to more prosperous countries like Germany.
@nightgerbil
Poles in UK are legal immigrants. They pay taxes, they don't work under minimum wage. It's fair play. If you lost a job to somebody who doesn't even speak english, you really are lazy.
The Poles that don't speak English are the people in their 40's or older. They were never all that bright to begin with and just can't learn a language at this age anymore. But they can still work in construction or similar and pay taxes for English benefit leeches, can't they?
Illegals who want to assimilate? Sure, there are some. But don't expect an effort to join the society from somebody who has been taught from early age that we are all pigs who will burn in hell.
By the way: Poles don't really need to assimilate, beyond learning the language. Our cultures are almost identical, apart from some minor quirks. And yes, your food is fucking terrible, which is why all the English themselves eat chinese, indian, italian or french food.
@anonymous
The problem is assimilation. If you go to a country with no real tranferable skills, no knowledge of the language, and from a culure that is extremely foreign, you will be a leech regardless of your intentions. I am an engineer (probably a high value skill) and can somewhat speak and understand German, and I still wouldn't be able to function as a proper citizen for at least 4-6 months if I moved to Germany right now.
Giving people jobs just because they showed up will simply encourage them to never assimilate into the country. If however they do their paperwork, show that they are willing to learn the language/culture and that they are generally willing to co-exist, then sure, welcome aboard.
@ Nightgerbil:
That's pretty racist, but that of course is a typical English character trait.
The English mob that are attacking EU citizens, who are working LEGALLY in jobs way above minimal pay, openly in public streets are the main reason why all the efforts of your "wise political leaders" to negotiate favours from Poland will fail! Do you believe that news of Polish citizens being attacked on English streets by an angry English mob will put the Polish government, which is nationalist, a positive attitude towards those, who let this mob rise? F...NO!
Poland and it's people have ALL the reason to despise and hate England because England willingly failed to delive the promise to liberate Poland from NAzi occupation and reinstall the elected government.
England sent MILLIONS of political refugees, who had fled the bolshevik Stalin rule to their deaths. It is documented and no one speaks about it, but you are worse than the Nazis. The weay you treated your colonies was nothing short of nationalist nazi rules and the concept of concentration camps was bor nin the Boer Wars.
Now, England is trembling because Brexit will have severe consequences and most of the important trading companies have already plans for leaving England.
English socialism and the labour unions have ruined the English economy. Thatcher slowed that process down and was a tough partner in all the EU negotiations, but she had a vision and worked for it. Your current leaders have none of that, they read polls and and try to fix any crisis only when it surfaces...
@Gevlon:
The reason why this policy works for Hungary is because Germany exists. This policy is not making refugees/immigrants/leeches return home, but migrate to more favourable places... As you may know, there will be federal elections in 2017 and things might change drastically. The political right is growing rapidly and is getting more and more influence. Political entities are trying to get to an understanding in order to get rid of Merkel. When they succeed, immigration policy in Germany will drastically change as the federal states are beginning to deport illegal immigrants more strictly.
Judges have decided taht Syrian immigrants only get subsidiary protection, which means that their legal stay is limited in time...
Most countries already employ similar measures. The differences are in the method of enforcement
Making life harder for undocumented workers forces them into the shadow economy. That makes them more vulnerable to exploitation, avoid tax, work much more cheaply (destroying jobs), support criminal businesses and producing unregulated-sub-standard products.
To reduce illegal immigration, you need to crack down on the gang-leaders, traffickers and exploiters who profit from illegal labour. Target the criminals that run the "support" networks and you greatly reduce the pull forces that import, recruit and retain undocumented workers.
@Tithian
Assimilation is only a problem in social area. Immigrants with vastly different value systems are simply incompatible with local societies.
The economic problem has nothing to do whatsoever with assimilation. It is much simpler than that: every immigrant is an extra pair of hands on the labour market. They compete against locals for the lowest earning jobs, cheapest accomodation and public services. The journalists, politicians and CEOs a not worried about Jose taking their job, but they very much welcome María who will be a cheaper barrista at Starbucks, cheaper maid and cheaper workforce for their factories.
Immigration would be fine if the immigrants earned on average as much as locals. Then everything remains as it was and nobody is worse off. As it is in US, mexican and black immigrants are earning much less and are as such praised by middle class but reviled by working class. However, Asian immigrants usually go to college and earn on average more than white middle class journalists, so you will find plenty of criticism af Asians in the press and such. Also, a penalty to SAT scores for them.
There is a difference between "giving people jobs" and "forbidding people to have legal jobs" as I am sure you are aware.
Put back the goalposts, please.
the USA already has restrictions for illegal immigrants (The key is in illegal). It is also not a problem of the immigrants, it is a problem of the employers who knowingly and willingly employ people at a lower rate than they would otherwise have to.
In some cases, once the employees have settled in properly, they call in immigration, and start over fresh by the time the old employees have reached the border being deported.
Hungary may have other reasons that people are not flocking to there for work than its immigration policies, although, the footage from last year and recent developments help move it further down the "Countries that I may want to live in" for immigrants, whether legal or not.
from Tithian I am an engineer (probably a high value skill) and can somewhat speak and understand German, and I still wouldn't be able to function as a proper citizen for at least 4-6 months if I moved to Germany right now.
You will be fine on week one. as long as you can greet and say goodbye and have a bit of curtosy.
But what is a "proper citizen"?
I'm German (with german+dutch family roots) and I consider myself not a proper citizen. I don't partake in cultural feasts, nor do I have friends and I refuse a lot of etiquette. I do the minimum to get by, especially since my parents died a couple years ago. Only do work and there I talk the most. for the rest no partner no friends no siblings no party no pubbing no other family nearby. In a way the same way isolated, the only difference between me and those foreign idiots is I understand german and speak it and don't leech.
There is no good way to deal with this. And leaders say conflicting stuff like in Merkels "Islam is part of Germany" speech (translation in the description). Sure as long as all these idiots truly understand and defend secularism - I'm ok with it. if a arab man living 40y in germany still can't speak german .. ok. I don't really mind. live and let live as long as everybody pays taxes right?
But their asshole minority has a criminal tendency that goes unchecked in our politician correctness blind society. I'm sick of it. In a very provocative way I have to admit that Pad Condell nailed it. We have laws but we don't want to enforce them because liberal snowflakes would think the police racist or what ever.
@99smite I was kind of with you although despite all the BREXIT noise most British and indeed English (not the same) are not that way inclined. Try not to pander to stereotypes and hysterical headlines. Your historical narrative is broadly correct if a little unpalatable to the Empire myth but while labour "socialist" period prior to Thatcher was not a brilliant economic success, Thatcher's monetarist policies that influenced Reaganomics were disastrous. The cheap credit boom and subsequent bust in 2008 can be directly attributed to her and those who followed her lead in subsequent administrations. And it was Thatcher that first set the anti EU tone that ultimately led to BREXIT. Far from quaking, her modern followers are delighted as they have achieved her vision. Sure they maybe misguided. But the EU has issues too. Enough issues for the majority of the UK to decide against it. Flawed as it is, that is democracy.
You should title your list:
"How to make sure all illegal immigrants become criminals ASAP!"
Because that's what you're doing: Forcing people into criminal careers. Sure, it looks better on TV when you don't have police rounding up harmless poor people, but having more criminals in your country is not an improvement. I'd rather pay more for welfare programs than getting robbed on the street: In both cases I lose money, but in the latter I'm also in actual danger.
I find it deeply ironic that after I stated I would allow illegals to stay if they were willing to work and live by our laws, but I would deport crimimals, Third worlders who attack/sexually assault women is declared rascist. The majority of " That's pretty racist, but that of course is a typical English character trait." don't care if you are black, white, muslim or martian we just want you to live by our laws, respect our customs and not insult us in public. That latter point is the reason for the anti polish backlash.
This is the exact mentality that is closing down debate and is why those who have legitmate concerns are being driven into the arms of the alt right. Watch this and think about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs
This approach has been attempted in the US by Republicans, but has failed to see any real implementation. Partly this is blocked by the Supreme Court, which blocks almost all discrimination based on immigration status. The real problem, though, is that the Democrats are 100% on the side of illegals, and the Republicans are not willing to wage the political war necessary to see these policies through.
Worker verification has been implemented, but inconsistently. There are raids here and there, but for every 1 you catch, 10 slip through.
The united states already has a similar set of laws, the problems is that they're unenforceable.
Take a big company like Walmart. Walmart has over 10,000 stores and over 1.4 workers in the US. Going through all those locations and that roster of employees takes manpower and time that no regulatory agency really has at their disposal. Even when Walmart was caught employing Illegal immigrants, the penalty wasn't that tough. Walmart had to pay the largest fine ever collected for employing illegal immigrants, the grand total of 11 million dollars. That fine didn't even dent Walmart's profit margin that year, and has done nothing to stop them from continuing to employ illegal immigrants.
Illegal immigrants aren't allowed to buy homes and aren't allowed to using banking services here in the states already. The problem is, they can easily get citizens to do those things for them or just not use those services. I can see how you'd think only the rich illegals could manage to still get these services, but it happens all the time here. Illegal workers will stay in homes legally purchased by citizens, usually in large groups. A house in my neighborhood once housed a group of about 15 illegal workers.
The problem isn't that we don't have the laws, it's that the laws don't work. We don't devote the resources to catching people for breaking them, and when we do catch them we don't have a system to punish the offense properly.
What we should really do is expand the rights of illegal workers. Instead of creating a situation where employers or landlords can abuse them with impunity, we should give them equal treatment as workers and tenants. Right now, the risk of being caught employing an illegal worker is outweighed by the benefit of employing them. We could attack that problem from the risk side, as you suggest, but treating illegal workers equally attacks the problem from the benefit side. If the company has to treat an illegal worker like a legal citizen, there is no greater benefit for breaking the law anymore.
Poles move to the UK for the same reason Mexicans move to the USA, that the western and eastern halves of the EU are not economically compatible. When someone leaves an engineering or teaching job in Poland to do bar or shop work in the UK, that is a net loss for everyone.
The EU was sold to the public as being a "trading bloc" and nothing more. Had we known the truth about the monstrosity it would eventually become then the 1970s referendum would have been different and such a situation would not exist in the first place.
Anonymous at 30 November, 2016 19:30:
"What we should really do is expand the rights of illegal workers."
The obvious flaw with this is it makes being an illegal more attractive, not less. It's like having a field full of feral cats by your house. The solution is obvious, feral cat hunting! And this comes from a cat lover! Feeding them and rescuing them to shelters will just make it worse. There is NO SHORTAGE of cats.
The best way to deal with illegals is to not allow them in in the first place. No "Come in and we'll process your refugee status." None of that. You do the processing in the country of origin and deny entry to anyone without the proper paperwork. This stupidity of "Oh! You managed to sneak in! Good job! Here's a permiso!" had to stop.
Sorry, liberals, but there is no perfect possible future where we all sing kumbaya and dance. You have to protect your own lands first.
Looks like the Hungarian system is so effective, migrants aren't even being sent there anymore. http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/12/01/german-court-forbids-deportation-migrants-hungary/
@smokeman - My overpriced liberal education featured more pragmatism then my kumbaya singing compatriots.
The thing that makes coming to this country illegally attractive is the money. A person can come here from Mexico, where they make less then four dollars an hour, and get a job working for eight dollars or more easily. Any solution that doesn't address that simple truth is doomed to failure.
You say we should keep them out: How? People have climbed mountains, dived to the depths of the ocean and landed on the moon for no promise of reward greater then being able to say they did it, or that they did it first. You put a wall between them and opportunity, and they'll find a way over, through, around or under that wall. There is not a barrier built by man that another man can't overcome. Point of fact, you can already see this effect: Look up Narco subs and drug tunnels. It's sort of pointless to build something that's already defeated, don't you think?
Since trying to attack the ability of a person to go around a wall is pointless, I choose to attack the problem from the opportunity side. There are three major reasons employers like using illegal immigrants:
1). Lower Wages and overhead. It's much cheaper to pay someone money under a table and off the record for their work.
2). Lack of Agency for the Worker. Employers can mistreat or overwork these illegal workers because the workers have no rights. They can't do anything about abuse because they're not even supposed to be there.
3). Competition for Legal Workers. Illegals act as scabs against legal workers. An employer who can simply replace a legal worker with an illegal worker will inevitably use that against their legal workers to suppress grievances and keep wages low.
These benefits are what drive employer demand for these workers. As long as that demand exists, there will always be someone who's willing to cross the border by any means at their disposal to fill the need. The minute an employer has to treat an illegal as an equal to a legal worker, the demand for illegal workers is gone and illegal workers will leave with it.
Here's the kicker: My plan makes money while walls and immigration enforcement cost money. Poor migrants don't have much spare cash, but wealthy employers and companies do. If you enforce the law by actively fining employers for abuses, you could run an agency profitably. A wall and it's required maintenance might as well just be a hole in the ground you just throw money into.
Anonymous:
You don't have to stop all of them. And when you start stopping any at all, the rest get the message fast and do the cost benefit analysis of even trying. If the word in Mexico is you could die trying to cross the border, most will stop trying.
Border management is not an option. It's the first line.
@smokeman - Unless you have a plan on how to make crossing into the US more intimidating then living in mexico already is, border management is a waste of time. In fact, you don't seem to realize that you're wasting most of your time on people who are just coming over here to do honest work.
There are drug cartels in mexico, and working for them is a lot more lucrative then sweeping floors. If they people wanted to get the most money for their time, they'd just work for the cartels. They choose to come here and sweep floors. The reality is, if these people couldn't make money in the US, they'd probably head somewhere else.
Your border management plan is also self-defeating in this way. Unless you deal with the employers, that opportunity is still going to be there for someone. The dream is that an american worker will fill that position. The reality is, that employer will still want the cheapest worker available. Employers who can't get cheap workers from mexico will get them elsewhere. You're not stopping people from coming in, you're just creating an industry to bring them in. People from countries without the luxury of sharing a border with the US already have to deal with these services. Did you think all the Asian illegal immigrants swam here? No, they were brought here by criminal organizations who specialize in bringing them over.
That's the real effect of your border management plan: Creating industry for criminals.
Post a Comment