Immigration is bad because...

I’ll admit I haven’t followed the immigration issue. Everyone calls it a big problem. What exactly is the problem with thousands of people from South America entering the US? And don’t say “it’s illegal”. I want to know what the real problem is.

I'll admit I haven't followed the immigration issue. Everyone calls it a big problem. What exactly is the problem with thousands of people from South America entering the US? And don't say "it's illegal". I want to know what the real problem is.
First off, why can't we say it's illegal? Let's take and break this right down methodically. Before we move on(hopefully... I can't speak for other posters.)let's start right there. That's a phrase right in your initial post and query. Right in your initial quest for Inquiry. For discussion. Why can't we say it's illegal? If we are going to discuss this, Inquire about it, then why must we initially strike a relevant, actual, meaningful qualifier from the discussion at your request?

Because legality and morality are separate issues.

There is nothing wrong with immigration. There is plenty wrong with illegal immigration. A country has a right to control the number of people immigrating in. Without such control there would be chaos and financial ruin.
To say, "Immigration is bad because . . . " would be like saying, “Inviting people in to your house is bad because . . .”, implying that any number of people, friends or strangers, can assume they are invited at any time, to sleep where they please, eat your food, expect you to pay for clothing, medical, transportation and education expenses. and why not? You pay for those things for your own family members, don’t you? Why not for anyone who wants to come in? Would it be right if you were accused of not being neighborly if you should want to limit the flow?

Because legality and morality are separate issues.
The OP should have been entitled "Why is the unauthorized entry of foreign nationals into another country illegal?" It's illegal in almost every country in the world. That's where Cuthbert should have started, seeing as how he "hasn't been following the immigration issue that closely". Morals and Legality are related.
I'll admit I haven't followed the immigration issue. Everyone calls it a big problem. What exactly is the problem with thousands of people from South America entering the US? And don't say "it's illegal". I want to know what the real problem is.
That qualification puts the debate in perspective. People don't want to discuss the subtleties of how and when to help people, even to the point of not wanting to deal with a small number of children in need. We live in a country that is supposed to be constantly reviewing its laws and questioning the authority handed down from the previous generation. Fortunately enough people do that to keep us progressing, but more and more are sticking to the non-argument that "it's how we have always done it."

I think Lois pretty much hit the nail on the head. Immigration can be a positive thing when the its done in an orderly fashion and the immigrant has something to contribute to their new country. On the other hand when immigration occurs at a pace that overwhelms the existing resources and social supports and when there is no filter on the type of individuals that are allowed to enter it can clearly be harmful.
Letting a reasonable number of highly trained scientists and engineers immigrate could be a big plus, but allowing hoards of illiterate, uneducated and unemployed people in who quickly tap social services would be an enormous drain especially if there are some criminals sprinkled in among them.
This is what legal immigration is all about. Its about a countries right to impose restrictions so that immigration will be beneficial and not harmful. Illegal immigration removes the safeguards that protect a country from harmful immigration.

I think we have to recognize the less publicized aspects of immigration from the Latin Americas. First, Obama has repeatedly requested a good sized appropriation to fund personnel and equipment to block this immigration, but the Republican Congress, namely Boehner, won’t even let it come up for a vote. If the Republicans are so strongly against this immigration, why won’t they go along with efforts to stop it?
The reason is simple - corporations can hire them (the workers, but also the Congressmen) at very low wages, not give them the perqs U.S. workers require, don’t pay them overtime, etc. In other words, much more profit for employers. However, they do have to pay unemployment insurance and Social Security deductions to the government, but the workers will never be able to collect on those so the government makes money from them.
As long as employers hire them they’ll keep coming. If we want to stop this influx, we need extremely harsh punishments for the employers to prevent them from hiring them. We need things like a mandatory 20 year imprisonment without possibility of parole for the top five percent of company management, and government confiscation of all the company assets to be sold on the open market for any company found to be hiring undocumented workers. And include a $100,000 payment for anyone who reports such hiring.
Occam

I think Lois pretty much hit the nail on the head. Immigration can be a positive thing when the its done in an orderly fashion and the immigrant has something to contribute to their new country. On the other hand when immigration occurs at a pace that overwhelms the existing resources and social supports and when there is no filter on the type of individuals that are allowed to enter it can clearly be harmful. Letting a reasonable number of highly trained scientists and engineers immigrate could be a big plus, but allowing hoards of illiterate, uneducated and unemployed people in who quickly tap social services would be an enormous drain especially if there are some criminals sprinkled in among them. This is what legal immigration is all about. Its about a countries right to impose restrictions so that immigration will be beneficial and not harmful. Illegal immigration removes the safeguards that protect a country from harmful immigration.
The idea of resources being overwhelmed seems central to Lois' argument. It is valid as an argument for having an immigration policy. It does NOT apply to the current situation of Central America children arriving at our southern border. I'm not sure when it has ever applied to any real situation in this country. Bill Moyers on refugees]
I think Lois pretty much hit the nail on the head. Immigration can be a positive thing when the its done in an orderly fashion and the immigrant has something to contribute to their new country. On the other hand when immigration occurs at a pace that overwhelms the existing resources and social supports and when there is no filter on the type of individuals that are allowed to enter it can clearly be harmful. Letting a reasonable number of highly trained scientists and engineers immigrate could be a big plus, but allowing hoards of illiterate, uneducated and unemployed people in who quickly tap social services would be an enormous drain especially if there are some criminals sprinkled in among them. This is what legal immigration is all about. Its about a countries right to impose restrictions so that immigration will be beneficial and not harmful. Illegal immigration removes the safeguards that protect a country from harmful immigration.
The idea of resources being overwhelmed seems central to Lois' argument. It is valid as an argument for having an immigration policy. It does NOT apply to the current situation of Central America children arriving at our southern border. I'm not sure when it has ever applied to any real situation in this country. Bill Moyers on refugees] Can you expand on that? If we have resources we can't access under the system we have, what good are they? How do you propose we access them? Please give a practical solution, not pie in the sky.
I think Lois pretty much hit the nail on the head. Immigration can be a positive thing when the its done in an orderly fashion and the immigrant has something to contribute to their new country. On the other hand when immigration occurs at a pace that overwhelms the existing resources and social supports and when there is no filter on the type of individuals that are allowed to enter it can clearly be harmful. Letting a reasonable number of highly trained scientists and engineers immigrate could be a big plus, but allowing hoards of illiterate, uneducated and unemployed people in who quickly tap social services would be an enormous drain especially if there are some criminals sprinkled in among them. This is what legal immigration is all about. Its about a countries right to impose restrictions so that immigration will be beneficial and not harmful. Illegal immigration removes the safeguards that protect a country from harmful immigration.
The idea of resources being overwhelmed seems central to Lois' argument. It is valid as an argument for having an immigration policy. It does NOT apply to the current situation of Central America children arriving at our southern border. I'm not sure when it has ever applied to any real situation in this country. Bill Moyers on refugees] I think you are mistaken here. The main resources we are referring to here are food, housing and health care. There is evidence of all of these being strained as the result of immigration. Illegal immigration often results in 20-30 people living in residences meant for 5 or 6. Schools in some areas are strained by an influx of kids needing additional help and illegal aliens frequently show up in emergency rooms for care leaving false credentials accessing care that you and I the have to pay for. Uninsured users of healthcare are a large reason your premiums are higher than they otherwise would be and illegal immigration increases the cost of schools police and other public services which add to your tax bill. If you can say that most people think their taxes and health insurance premiums are affordable then your statement might be correct. I don't think that is the case though.

Bill Moyers on Refugees.
Wilford Brimley for Nature Granola Cereal.
Bill O’Reilly on Affirmative Action.
If those kids were refugees then they would have stopped in Mexico. Refugees don’t usually travel through 2-3 countries to seek general
safety and shelter. If they were refugees why didn’t they just go to Panama or Mexico? Why didn’t they ride a train to Brazil?
Refugees my foot. They are just one more publicity stunt being used to get amnesty for the 15 million illegal aliens already in this country.
It’s just another Elian Gonzalazes publicity stunt.
Brazil just hosted the World Cup…surely they can host a few refugees right?

Lausten-People don’t want to discuss the subtleties of how and when to help people, even to the point of not wanting to deal with a small number of children in need.

Quoting Lausten from the “Children Crossing The Mexican Border” thread…

Lausten-No. It’s the entire history of prejudice. Get people to hate other people who are just like them, except for their ethnicity. Get them to focus on fighting each other for the scraps you are throwing them. If I’m wrong, then you need to come up with a justification for why you get to have everything you have. You can’t deny that America was built on war and slavery. If we somehow deserve this land and others don’t, then you are saying all of that is just and right.
I don't think it's very clear where Lausten's ideals and sympathies lie. I'm not sure he has a very good understanding either. Not a practical understanding anyways.
I think you are mistaken here. The main resources we are referring to here are food, housing and health care. There is evidence of all of these being strained as the result of immigration. Illegal immigration often results in 20-30 people living in residences meant for 5 or 6. Schools in some areas are strained by an influx of kids needing additional help and illegal aliens frequently show up in emergency rooms for care leaving false credentials accessing care that you and I the have to pay for. Uninsured users of healthcare are a large reason your premiums are higher than they otherwise would be and illegal immigration increases the cost of schools police and other public services which add to your tax bill. If you can say that most people think their taxes and health insurance premiums are affordable then your statement might be correct. I don't think that is the case though.
Really? You're just going to say "there is evidence"? Really? Schools in "some areas"? Come on.
If we have resources we can't access under the system we have, what good are they? How do you propose we access them?
Tell me what you're talking about and I'll respond to it.
I think you are mistaken here. The main resources we are referring to here are food, housing and health care. There is evidence of all of these being strained as the result of immigration. Illegal immigration often results in 20-30 people living in residences meant for 5 or 6. Schools in some areas are strained by an influx of kids needing additional help and illegal aliens frequently show up in emergency rooms for care leaving false credentials accessing care that you and I the have to pay for. Uninsured users of healthcare are a large reason your premiums are higher than they otherwise would be and illegal immigration increases the cost of schools police and other public services which add to your tax bill. If you can say that most people think their taxes and health insurance premiums are affordable then your statement might be correct. I don't think that is the case though.
I'd like to see that evidence, Mac. The Affordable Health Care Act has made insurance affordable to millions of people who could not afford health care from for-profit companies.
I think you are mistaken here. The main resources we are referring to here are food, housing and health care. There is evidence of all of these being strained as the result of immigration. Illegal immigration often results in 20-30 people living in residences meant for 5 or 6. Schools in some areas are strained by an influx of kids needing additional help and illegal aliens frequently show up in emergency rooms for care leaving false credentials accessing care that you and I the have to pay for. Uninsured users of healthcare are a large reason your premiums are higher than they otherwise would be and illegal immigration increases the cost of schools police and other public services which add to your tax bill. If you can say that most people think their taxes and health insurance premiums are affordable then your statement might be correct. I don't think that is the case though.
I'd like to see that evidence, Mac. The Affordable Health Care Act has made insurance affordable to millions of people who could not afford health care from for-profit companies. Darron that is correct but I'm not sure it's relevant here. Illegal aliens can't access insurance under the ACA and even if the were able to legally do so they do not generally have the income to afford it. Most illegal new immigrants from central and South America are either uninsured or they are insured through Medicaid which they pay nothing for. You and I finance Medicaid through our tax dollars and pay for uninsured patients who use the ER when the hospital passes on the cost to everyone else by way of higher fees.

You’d know more about that than me, but I think a much larger problem is uninsured Americans going to emergency rooms for health care, often after putting off medical attention that could have prevented an emergency room visit.
The bottom line is we need universal health care in this country.
But that discussion is off-topic for this thread. The OP concerned Central American children coming to the U.S. to escape enslavement, torture and death at home. Would you look them in their eyes and tell them they are not welcome here?

Darron that is correct but I'm not sure it's relevant here. Illegal aliens can't access insurance under the ACA and even if the were able to legally do so they do not generally have the income to afford it. Most illegal new immigrants from central and South America are either uninsured or they are insured through Medicaid which they pay nothing for. You and I finance Medicaid through our tax dollars and pay for uninsured patients who use the ER when the hospital passes on the cost to everyone else by way of higher fees.
You have done no research into this issue. Undocumented aliens are not all migrant farmers and day laborers. Many have real jobs with a fake SSN. So taxes are taken out of their paycheck, just like everybody, put they can't file, so they never get a return.
Darron that is correct but I'm not sure it's relevant here. Illegal aliens can't access insurance under the ACA and even if the were able to legally do so they do not generally have the income to afford it. Most illegal new immigrants from central and South America are either uninsured or they are insured through Medicaid which they pay nothing for. You and I finance Medicaid through our tax dollars and pay for uninsured patients who use the ER when the hospital passes on the cost to everyone else by way of higher fees.
You have done no research into this issue. Undocumented aliens are not all migrant farmers and day laborers. Many have real jobs with a fake SSN. So taxes are taken out of their paycheck, just like everybody, put they can't file, so they never get a return. Laustren you are incorrect. I have spent 24 years working in medicine and done a fair amount of work in ER's. I can tell you that undocumented workers coming to the ER without insurance is a daily occurrence even in the upper middle class area where I currently work. When I first started in practice I moonlighted in an ER in a very low income area of the city and the majority of the patients in that ER were undocumented immigrants or recent immigrants who were uninsured or insured through medicaid (which again you and I pay for). The point of this argument is not that people shouldn't be allowed to immigrate to the U.S. but that we have every right to decide who and how many can come in a given period of time just as nearly every other country does. Darron, to answer your question of course it would be difficult to look a child in the eyes and tell them they can;t come in. I would ask you then how would you solve this problem. Should we let any individual under a certain age enter who wants to? Keep in mind that the money spent to support and care for these children has to come from somewhere else. Should we look an American child in the eye and tell them we can't afford their school lunch program? Every choice has consequences that we have to deal with. These dilemmas don't exist in a vacuum and we don't have an unlimited budget even though politicians sometimes act like we do.