Don we all come here with different levels of opinions as to what will solve our immigration problems. Some of those differences come from our exposure and contact with immigrants, and also how wealthy or poor the area it that we live in. Everything has its positive and its negative, but we are seeing a loss of our culture in many areas. You may be right when some issues are addressed and completely wrong when others are brought into the mix. There is no correct blanket yes or no. You must realize that not everyone has seen exactly what you've seen or heard exactly what you've heard. What we can all agree on is there's been far too many people come here in the last 30 years while our government has looked the other way, and it has impacted the US in a very negative way.

How many "legal" immigrants do you think we should allow into the country to compete with unemployed Americans for jobs, housing, health care and other public benefits?

I would love to have an answer to this question. For years people have taken great pains to clarify that they are not against all immigration, but only against "illegal" immigration. [I guess it's OK if third world hordes come here "legally" to take our country away from us without firing a shot.]

I have repeatedly asked this question: "How many legal immigrants do you want?) As yet I have never received a direct, honest answer.

If you support "legal immigration," please state how many "legal" immigrants you would like to be brought into the country to compete with unemployed Americans for jobs and public benefits?

If you are opposed to all immigration, both "legal" and "illegal", then you're on the same page that I am.

I answered that one Don.

I don't think I want to stop all immigration though. A drastic reduction yes, but not a complete halt. Does that suffice?

Well maybe an equal number as the amount of Americans who immigrate to other countries. But I nor do I think anyone on this board has all the facts to give you a proper answer. It just seems you come across as a bit aggressive. Maybe I'm reading what you wrote wrong. How someone writes something and how they mean it don't always come across exactly as the writer meant. I do agree with you that we should cut way back on immigration, but not that it should be cut completely. This is how I believe many Americans feel, but then again, I could be wrong on that thought also. We are not being informed by the media and many others as to the exact truth on the issue.

I must agree that Don has a point or more regarding illegal and legal immigration as being factors that have destroyed our American way of life.

I currently work in a major city where most Americans have been replaced by foreigners. This includes American engineers.

I interact with many foreign born engineers that barely speak English.

So then where are those engineering jobs for our graduate students?
Even there classroom seats have been given to foreign students.

I would severely curtail legal immigration also. We have been overrun on that front too.

Lets get our house in order first and then we may have a just immigration system.

That's an interesting take. I disagree with you. My experience has been that the large majority of folks who are active about border enforcement want either reduced legal immigration or current laws enforced. Nonetheless, I give you points for candor.


-------------------------

Since we're tossing ideas around, however, about changes to the immigration system, I would reduce legal immigration from Mexico and Central American countries by 2/3. Reason: It forces them to start looking for other solutions to fixing their poverty than exporting their least wanted citizens to the United States. Right now, the U.S. is an "enabler" for the incompetence/corruption/lack of decent opportunities that exists in El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Honduras, etc. They don't have to really get their act together. The ability to have the poorest go elsewhere (and send Yankee dollars home, to boot) is a huge release valve on forces that would otherwise result in change.

Legal and illegal immigration are connected. For example, when we hear about some business being prosecuted for hiring illegal immigrants, you have to ask yourself, "How are these illegal immigrants hired and managed?" There must be somebody there in the business, maybe even the owner, who speaks the language of the illegals they are hiring. Either the employer is a legal immigrant, or in all probability, an anchor baby themselves.

Yes, we need to have a moratorium on immigration. But not only that, we need to start cracking down on citizens too. If you are a citizen claiming citizenship because you are an anchor baby, and you are hiring illegals, then you need to be deported. Of course this should follow from putting the legal claims of citizenship made by anchor babies into question and in prosecutions like this, this is a natural place to start throwing them out. Of course, anyone who does not claim citizenship who is hiring illegals needs to be deported.

How many people in this country who falsely claim citizenship do not speak English? Because so many anchor babies have the benefits of a public education, this is where many of them learn to speak English. But it remains that many of them have no cause to speak English and so the skill fades, we hope. And of course we still have illegals from English speaking countries like Canada. If you cannot speak English, you cannot be a citizen and so we have another sound test for real candidates for testing legitimate citizenship.

We need to keep pushing and hammering away at this problem at every possible and conceivable angle. Stopping at legal immigrants is just foolish, it really shows a complete lack of grasp of the problem. I would go so far as to say that you cannot sincerely be opposed to illegal immigration if you do not support confronting legal immigration and even some who claim citizenship. The problem really is that bad and illegal immigration is really just the natural consequence of a failed and profligate immigration practice. It is a "practice", one could hardly call it a "policy", certainly not a government policy.

I personally know of two business owners who are from Israel and Lebanon and they both hire Hispanics. I don't know if the Hispanics are legal or not. But my point here is that both business owners learned Spanish and while at work converse with their employees in Spanish. Just about everyone, including the immigrants cater to the Hispanic/Latinos when it comes to their not having to speak English. We're so inundated with Spanish speakers that they don't feel the need to learn English, and so many accept that opinion.

Being the world's most desired immigration destination is one of our nation's strengths. As an example, what fueled much of the PC and dot.com boom(s) was our ability to draw the best engineers from India to Seattle and the Silicon Valley. Our capitalist system that allows for accumulation of wealth, our standard of living and reputation for adherence to civil liberties, allows us to "raid" other countries of their best and brightest. Contributions from people who graduated from engineering colleges with academic standards that make MIT and Cal Tech look like JC's in comparison, built businesses and created wealth that resulted in employment and money for thousands of U.S. citizens.

The problem is not that we are accepting immigrants. The problem is that we are largely accepting the wrong immigrants. We need more poorly educated peasants with a penchant for cranking out babies and screaming about their victimization by "racists" like Michael Jackson and Karen Carpenter needed Jenny Craig.