Bowsite.com

Can you imagine the outrage, here, if Obama would have said the same thing?

Matt

I believe that's exactly what the President was implying. See how you just called the people, not the place, a derivation of the world "shitty?" See how that's a lot different than recognizing that there are, indeed, shithole places in the world?

Yeah, I can imagine it Matt.

And #2, if Obama wanted for this country then it will be BAD for this country. And that's a fact, critically thought out and everything.

no the problem is they want me to pay for it.

I keep seeing these issues conflated. The conversation around which the shithole comment was made was related to legal immigration. It had nothing to do with illegal immigration. He was most definitely questioning whether individuals from certain countries should legally be allowed to immigrate to this country. Anyone that wants to throw up barriers or introduce "merit" based requirements is fundamentally against "free" immigration. I throw "free" in quotation marks because nobody is ever advocating for totally free borders - security screening shouldn't be relaxed.

Who is surprised that anyone would argue for policy that is in their own economic self interest? Unfortunately, this flies in the face of free market principles and is why special interest groups shouldn't be catered to.

During immigration negotiations between congressional leaders, it’s been widely reported that President Trump said why are we letting people from “sh*thole countries” come here. We have some people who confirm he said these remarks, while others don’t recall it. Sens. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and David Perdue (R-GA) said in a statement: “In regards to Senator Durbin’s accusation, we do not recall the President saying these comments specifically but what he did call out was the imbalance in our current immigration system, which does not protect American workers and our national interest. We, along with the President, are committed to solving an issue many in Congress have failed to deliver on for decades.”

(rest of story at link)

That's easy. The threat of immigrants coming into our country in present times, some have the intent to do us harm. Until that danger is passed. Stop all immigration, or significantly slow it down so it can be monitored closely.

Let's start by you telling us the true definition of a racist. Then show us proof of it.

“I have spoken of three changes in the national condition, all subjective, which greatly affect our capability of dealing with a large and tumultuous immigration. There is a fourth, which is objective. It concerns the character of the foreigners now resorting to our shores. Fifty, even thirty years ago, there was a rightful presumption regarding the average immigrant that he was among the most enterprising, thrifty, alert, adventurous, and courageous of the community from which he came. It required no small energy, prudence, forethought, and pains to conduct the inquiries relating to his migration, to accumulate the necessary means, and to find his way across the Atlantic. To-day the presumption is completely reversed. So thoroughly has the continent of Europe been crossed by railways, so effectively has the business of emigration there been exploited, so much have the rates of railroad fares and ocean passage been reduced, that it is now among the least thrifty and prosperous members of any European community that the emigration agent finds his best recruiting-ground. The care and pains required have been reduced to a minimum; while the agent of the Red Star Line or the White Star Line is everywhere at hand, to suggest migration to those who are not getting on well at home. The intending emigrants are looked after from the moment they are locked into the cars in their native villages until they stretch themselves upon the floors of the buildings on Ellis Island, in New York. Illustrations of the ease and facility with which this Pipe Line Immigration is now carried on might be given in profusion. So broad and smooth is the channel, there is no reason why every foul and stagnant pool of population in Europe, which no breath of intellectual or industrial life has stirred for ages, should not be decanted upon our soil. Hard times here may momentarily check the flow; but it will not be permanently stopped so long as any difference of economic level exists between our population and that of the most degraded communities abroad.

But it is not alone that the presumption regarding the immigrant of today is so widely different from that which existed regarding the immigrant of thirty or fifty years ago. The immigrant of the former time came almost exclusively from western and northern Europe. We have now tapped great reservoirs of population then almost unknown to the passenger lists of our arriving vessels. Only a short time ago, the immigrants from southern Italy, Hungary, Austria, and Russia together made up hardly more than one per cent of our immigration. To-day the proportion has risen to something like forty per cent, and threatens soon to become fifty or sixty per cent, or even more. The entrance into our political, social, and industrial life of such vast masses of peasantry, degraded below our utmost conceptions, is a matter which no intelligent patriot can look upon without the gravest apprehension and alarm. These people have no history behind them which is of a nature to give encouragement. They have none of the inherited instincts and tendencies which made it comparatively easy to deal with the immigration of the olden time. They are beaten men from beaten races; representing the worst failures in the struggle for existence. Centuries are against them, as centuries were on the side of those who formerly came to us. They have none of the ideas and aptitudes which fit men to take up readily and easily the problem of self-care and self-government, such as belong to those who are descended from the tribes that met under the oak-trees of old Germany to make laws and choose chieftains.”

Their habits of life, again, are of the most revolting kind. Read the description given by Mr. Riis of the police driving from the garbage dumps the miserable beings who try to burrow in those depths of unutterable filth and slime in order that they may eat and sleep there! Was it in cement like this that the foundations of our republic were laid? What effects must be produced upon our social standards, and upon the ambitions and aspirations of our people, by a contact so foul and loathsome? The influence upon the American rate of wages of a competition like this cannot fail to be injurious and even disastrous. Already it has been seriously felt in the tobacco manufacture, in the clothing trade, and in many forms of mining industry; and unless this access of vast numbers of unskilled workmen of the lowest type, in a market already fully supplied with labor, shall be checked, it cannot fail to go on from bad to worse, in breaking down the standard which has been maintained with so much care and at so much cost. The competition of paupers is far more telling and more killing than the competition of pauper-made goods. Degraded labor in the slums of foreign cities may be prejudicial to intelligent, ambitious, self-respecting labor here; but it does not threaten half so much evil as does degraded labor in the garrets of our native cities.

Finally, the present situation is most menacing to our peace and political, safety. In all the social and industrial disorders of this country since 1877, the foreign elements have proved themselves the ready tools of demagogues in defying the law, in destroying property, and in working violence. A learned clergyman who mingled with the socialistic mob which, two years ago, threatened the State House and the governor of Massachusetts, told me that during the entire disturbance he heard no word spoken in any language which he knew, — either in English, in German, or in French. There may be those who can contemplate the addition to our population of vast numbers of persons having no inherited instincts of self-government and respect for law; knowing no restraint upon their own passions but the club of the policeman or the bayonet of the soldier; forming communities, by the tens of thousands, in which only foreign tongues are spoken, and into which can steal no influence from our free institutions and from popular discussion. But I confess to being far less optimistic. I have conversed with one of the highest officers of the United States army and with one of the highest officers of the civil government regarding the state of affairs which existed during the summer of 1894; and the revelations they made of facts not generally known, going to show how the ship of state grazed along its whole side upon the rocks, were enough to appall the most sanguine American, the most hearty believer in free government. Have we the right to expose the republic to any increase of the dangers from this source which now so manifestly threaten our peace and safety?

For it is never to be forgotten that self-defense is the first law of nature and of nations. If that man who careth not for his own household is worse than an infidel, the nation which permits its institutions to be endangered by any cause which can fairly be removed is guilty not less in Christian than in natural law. Charity begins at home; and while the people of the United States have gladly offered an asylum to millions upon millions of the distressed and unfortunate of other lands and climes, they have no right to carry their hospitality one step beyond the line where American institutions, the American rate of wages, the American standard of living, are brought into serious peril. All the good the United States could do by offering indiscriminate hospitality to a few millions more of European peasants, whose places at home will, within another generation, be filled by others as miserable as themselves, would not compensate for any permanent injury done to our republic. Our highest duty to charity and to humanity is to make this great experiment, here, of free laws and educated labor, the most triumphant success that can possibly be attained. In this way we shall do far more for Europe than by allowing its city slums and its vast stagnant reservoirs of degraded peasantry to be drained off upon our soil. Within the decade between 1880 and 1890 five and a quarter millions of foreigners entered our ports! No nation in human history ever undertook to deal with such masses of alien population. That man must be a sentimentalist and an optimist beyond all bounds of reason who believes that we can take such a load upon the national stomach without a failure of assimilation, and without great danger to the health and life of the nation. For one, I believe it is time that we should take a rest, and give our social, political, and industrial system some chance to recuperate. The problems which so sternly confront us to-day are serious enough without being complicated and aggravated by the addition of some millions of Hungarians, Bohemians, Poles, south Italians, and Russian Jews.”

because they want me to pay for it.

1. Have a trade skill or professional/technical skill which would be of value to the USA.

2. Have a US citizen sponsor you, which, among other things, meant they would be obligated to support you financially if you were unable to support yourself.

Then, even if you were cleared to immigrate, and unless and until you became a citizen, you had to report to the Feds IN PERSON every January to document who you were, where you were living, etc.

As a young boy, I'd hear those reminders on the radio every January and ask my mother if she had to report, because she'd immigrated from Northern Ireland in 1944 as a war bride.

But she'd become a citizen long before I was old enough to ask her, so she did not need to register/report.

If only we'd go back to those standards, there would be NO concerns about immigration.

There IS no disdain for immigrants here!!!!!!

There is only disdain for those who break our laws and come here ILLEGALLY!

Listen up!

I guess it's true. If you insist on going thru life stupid and ignorant, you better know how to fight! I doubt his ninja skills are all he claims they are tho!

Yup, there it is again. The sorry, sad refrain of the protectionist. The one who is afraid of people that doesn't look like him or act like him, wrecking their version of America. Might as well be Frank A. Walker speaking. Despite the fears (again, they've been there for well over 100 years), the paltry amount of immigrants that come into this country are not going to turn it into a shithole on the likes of the hell that most of them are leaving. This country wouldn't be who it is, economically or culturally, if we gave surrendered to Hackbow's isolationist American model.

As the great grandson of unskilled Italian immigrants who immigrated to America in the early 20th century to come work on railroads, steel mills, and farms, I know for a fact I wouldn't be here if we decided to restrict entry to anyone from the shithole country of the day. If you have any Irish, Jewish, Italian, Russian, Scandinavian, or Polish blood in you, chances are you wouldn't be here either.

BS. You're in the business of making future drug addicts. If Herion, Cocaine, Methamphetamine were legal in Colorado you'd be first in line to ruin people's lives by selling it to them. You're life does suck. It's infected with sin. WW is way out of your league.

And it's clear he believes in sampling his product regularly to ensure it's in fact of the highest quality.

"As the great grandson of unskilled Italian immigrants who immigrated to America in the early 20th century to come work on railroads, steel mills, and farms,"

Exactly. They came here. Maintained their culture in THEIR home. Didn't place demands on the government to accommodate their culture. Anonymous (Jack Smith) can confirm the demands and entitlements the muslim community has placed on Dearborn. And, while they may not have learned the language they made damn sure their kids did. They made damn sure their kids assimilated into America, cause they were god damn thankful they were here. They were proud to be identified as AMERICANS.

Your no border (no country mentality) makes me wonder if you're thankful or proud you're an American.

They cannot defend their positions intellectually nor factually, so that's all they've got.

Open (again, NOT open to terrorists or criminals) immigration is the policy that has made this country what it is. Arguing for restriction in this space flies in the face of this country's history and the policy that has reigned supreme for the bulk of this country's existence. So speaking out against your protectionism is defending the very policy that has made this country great.

The "must obey our laws" line is the biggest no brainer in the history of no brainers.

As far as "standards"...what standards are those and what are they referencing? Who defines American "standards"? Must they give up soccer and cricket for football and baseball? Gotta stop referring to arroz y frijoles and call it rice and beans? Sorry, doesn't jive with how I see this country working.

Whether people ultimately rise up or fail will be determined by the market, not by government regulation restricting who we want to compete. Free market policy doesn't say "bring on competition - as long as it's part of a certain profession, above a certain salary, from a certain country, etc" it says "bring on competition."

You want to have a conversation about welfare and immigration, fine. As I've stated previously, my preference is to build a wall around the welfare state (it doesn't need to expand one bit) and restrict non-citizen access rather than to more strictly regulate the international labor market. Where things stand, I believe the benefits of immigration (culturally and financially) far outweighs the .2% of my tax dollars that pays for welfare to immigrants.

"A learned clergyman who mingled with the socialistic mob which, two years ago, threatened the State House and the governor of Massachusetts, told me that during the entire disturbance he heard no word spoken in any language which he knew, — either in English, in German, or in French. There may be those who can contemplate the addition to our population of vast numbers of persons having no inherited instincts of self-government and respect for law; knowing no restraint upon their own passions but the club of the policeman or the bayonet of the soldier; forming communities, by the tens of thousands, in which only foreign tongues are spoken, and into which can steal no influence from our free institutions and from popular discussion. "

He was directly speaking to that wave of immigrants "inability" to assimilate. Again, as you rightly pointed out, history proved him wrong. The forces that cause assimilation are still there and just as strong (if not stronger), like ethnic attrition. By all measures of assimilation (English ability, rate of naturalization, naming of children, etc), immigrants are assimilating to American society faster than they did in the early 20th century.

"By all measures of assimilation (English ability, rate of naturalization, naming of children, etc), immigrants are assimilating to American society faster than they did in the early 20th century."

What's the phrase I'm looking for..........wait......oh yeah BULL SHIT. You haven't posted one statistic to back that up. OTOH, we have government documents, federal, state and local in over 80 different languages to accommodate those that have assimilated faster than those of 100 years ago. Annony really needs to weigh in on how the school districts in Dearborn have been forced to adopt muslim culture and restrictions. Hell, here in my own home county we have a very large population from that lil island in the Caribbean, that are 2nd and 3rd generation that are still not fluent in English. Why? Well why would they have to? We've made it too damn easy not to.

And the #1 name for new babies born in Denmark is Mohammed!

There's assimilation for you!

National Health Service (NHS) has said.

Biological men who regard themselves as women are being invited for cervical smear tests – even though it is impossible for them to have a cervix – an official guidebook states.

I stopped giving much credence to any "data" over the past 8 years, and now pretty much go by what my 65 years of existence has taught me.

"Bow-bender, I learned some time ago that I can post all the data in the world on this forum and nobody reads it or considers it as any part of an argument. Also, the public school I went to made sure to serve fish during Lent. Don’t act like it’s only for Muslims, and don’t act like it significantly adds to our costs as a country or impacts anyone’s day to day existence."

Post it anyhow. You might be surprised. As far as the cost or impact, you don't think providing a myriad of interpreters and documents in 80+ languages is NOT an impact? Actually the Muslim impact is big in Dearborn and Annonymous can attest to that.

The reality is, you want unrestricted travel between all countries. Ya, I know only the peaceful non crminal types. Curious, whose in charge of this......one world order. Since borders basically don't exist.

WW, with respect to borders, as it relates to commerce, we’d be better without them (more or less). As it relates to security, borders are very important.

You can read the conclusions at the link above (it was the analysis that I was referencing when I spoke to increased naturalization rates and increased English ability). This analysis is done with data from the US Census Bureau. The link to the full report with all the data is at the bottom of the link above. Three key takeaways are:

- Newly arrived immigrants of the early 21st century have assimilation index values lower than the newly arrived immigrants of the early 20th century. Growth in the immigrant population usually lowers the assimilation index because newly arrived immigrants drag down the average for the group as a whole. This phenomenon can be seen between 1900 and 1920 and again in the 1980s. The stability of the assimilation index since 1990 is therefore remarkable in light of the rapid growth of the immigrant population, which doubled between 1990 and 2006.

- Immigrants of the past quarter-century have assimilated more rapidly than their counterparts of a century ago, even though they are more distinct from the native population upon arrival. The increase in the rate of assimilation among recently arrived immigrants explains why the overall index has remained stable, even though the immigrant population has grown rapidly. - Yet the current level of assimilation remains lower than it was at any point during the early 20th century wave of immigration.

In other words, people arriving here are culturally a lot different than the people that arrived here 100 years ago; however, the rate at which they are assimilating is a lot more rapid than the rate at which immigrants assimilated 100 years ago.

I agree with most of his paper on Seattle.

The great thing about sound, data-driven analysis is that it’ll tell you what is happening, not what you think is happening. All the data suggests, on the whole, that immigrants are still coming to be American and that yes, they bring their culture with them (as they always have), but the rate at which their culture looks more American and less like wherever they came from is happening faster than it was 100 years ago. The data is inclusive of all those places you mention. It’s not to say there aren’t outliers, as this is an aggregated analysis.

We know Dick Lamm as the former Democrat Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Recently (2004) there was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Davis Hansen talked about his latest book, Mexifornia, explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'"

"Here is how they do it," Lamm said:

"First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country." History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: 'The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.' Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."

Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

Third, "We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: 'The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.' Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high. school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. E. Pluribus Unum -- From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus'. Instead of the 'Unum,' we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits; make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson's book, Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Even barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America - take note of California and other states - to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book, 1984. In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that the future of our great nation is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped quickly, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

Jacob Vigdor was a Duke (now University of Washington) professor, not a bureaucrat.

;-)

Matt

Just walk by any construction project or lawn maintenance crew out this way and all you'll hear spoken is Spanish.

Ahhh, yes. The epidemic of used toilet paper littering the bathrooms across the country. We've all seen the news stories and experienced it firsthand. If you missed it, that was supposed to be dripping with sarcasm. I've seen Americans do some pretty terrible things to bathrooms myself - in fact, trashing a public bathroom seems to be a sign of assimilation into this country based on my experience. Billboards and other signage in other languages is a sign of the free market at work, not some attempt to suppress the institutions and traditions of this country.

You keep bringing up this immigrant welfare argument. Most legal immigrants are ineligible for means-based welfare for the first five years they are in this country, so they don't come here expecting to be on the dole immediately (illegal immigrants are entirely ineligible). They come here to work. Beyond that, as far as our entitlement programs are concerned, there's ample evidence that suggests immigrants are net depositors vs. net takers with respect to our entitlement systems because of their ages, ineligibility, and their greater likelihood of retiring in other countries. To put it more clearly, they more than pay for themselves with respect to the welfare state.

"Immigration is a particularly difficult subject. There is no doubt that free and open immigration is the right policy in a libertarian state, but in a welfare state it is a different story: the supply of immigrants will become infinite."

I agree with Friedman. Which is why I've said that we should build a higher wall around the welfare state with respect to immigrants, rather than around the country.

"Sure I'm including what the illegals suck from we the people, they are part of this immigration"

Lol, you clearly don't know Milt very well. Milt's argument related to the welfare state and immigration is illegal immigration is exactly the kind of immigration you want because illegals (mostly) cannot benefit from the welfare state. As he states:

"Look, for example, at the obvious, immediate, practical example of illegal Mexican immigration. Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It’s a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It’s a good thing for the United States. It’s a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it’s only good so long as its illegal."

Personally, I think he was being a bit extreme in his statements and a more accurate phrase would be saying something like (from a purely economic perspective) immigration is "only good so long as it's legal" to something like immigration is "better if it's illegal."

- in a libertarian state, free immigration is unquestionably a good thing.

- in a welfare state, illegal immigration provides more economic benefit than does legal immigration. This is not hard to fathom - they provide the benefits of immigration without the access to the entitlements.

There is loads of source material that will provide you with all the context you need regarding Milt’s views. How anyone could think that the father of the free market would not be in favor of a free labor market is beyond me.

It's obviously also beyond your ability to understand the difference between unlimited/uncontrolled immigration and free labor markets.

How ironic to see such alledged support of free labor markets coming from a guy whose political party HATES free labor markets.

There. Fixed it.

Unions should be on the same level playing field as everyone else. No Davis-Bacon 'prevailing wage' BS, Right-to Work without being required to join a union, 'paycheck protection' so workers can't be forced to support policies and politics with which they disagree, etc.

"Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are very peaceful and highly productive.

A truly free market requires the free movement of people, not just products and ideas."

I entirely agree. I don't know what you think I believe, but it certainly isn't this. I also don't see how this relates at all to immigration.

Nothing in that statement suggests unfettered, unlimited immigration nor open borders. Further, the statement that "we welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life" implies a certain amount of vetting to be certain that is their intent.

A totally free labor market is one unencumbered by any immigration regulation. The flow of labor should be entirely free, driven by market forces not by government quotas, merit requirements, etc. It's that simple. That is what a free labor market looks like.

In today's world, this is never going to happen. The security risks that certain people pose necessitate at a minimum strong vetting procedures to make sure we don't let in people intent on inflicting harm. This needs to remain.

Assuming the systems above our sufficient to prevent the dangerous elements from entering the country, I support free labor market principles for other policy measures and that means we shouldn't restrict people based on income, language, place of origin, education levels, etc. All of these restrictions and regulations fly in the face of what a free labor market looks like.

On another note, the Democrats are calling Trump a racist but if he agrees to their DACA terms and conditions, he will no longer be considered a racist....Oh how convenient.

Somewhere between 1998 and now when Jesse jackson was commending Trump for his help with blacks and minorities, he became racist.

To put it another way, Friedman loves immigration and hates the welfare state. He's never advocated against immigration, he's advocating against welfare. Welfare is so bad, in Milt's view, that if you think about it, it actually makes illegal immigration preferable to legal immigration. As I've stated about a dozen times now, the best way to deal with this is not by restricting immigration, but by restricting immigrant access to welfare. We've done that to a degree. Legal immigrants must be here for five years before they can receive most types of Federal Aid. There are other solutions that can go further in addressing the problems with immigration in a welfare state, such as taxing immigrants in a way that would address any of the costs they burden the system with related to healthcare, education, etc. There are other solutions beyond building walls around this country.

How would you tax immigrants that burden the system with costs? If they don't have the money to pay for the services provided, how are they going to pay taxes? The system can't even collect money from the career welfare recipients already here it's wishful thinking that there is a solution by which they can recover the cost of services rendered. I'm not necessarily in disagreement with your free labor market concept but to think it could ever be made to work is more wishful thinking.

I promise you Milton Friedman would not be standing on your side when it comes to merit based immigration.

Good video, only Uncle Miltie apparently never considered the Left's wanting to make all illegals legal, thus making them eligible for all of the taxpayer funded benefits he mentions.

"...According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 42.4 percent of federal kidnapping convictions are of non-citizens. Non-citizens also account for 31.5 percent of federal drug convictions. Even though they’re only 8.4% of the population. Obviously there aren’t enough Americans to commit these crimes.

We need immigrants to commit the kidnappings and drug crimes that Americans just won’t do..."

We really need to import a lot more koranderthals...

We were concerned they might be delayed on their departure because of the outbreak of cholera in their region.

As we were helping to prepare the house they are renting I mentioned to the landlord that many of their going away get togethers were cancelled by the government's orders banning all gatherings of more than 5 persons. The landlord, a physician, immediately said "Defecation". When I questioned him, he said the primary cause of cholera is open, public defecation, usually a result of total lack of sanitary conditions as a result of crushing poverty.

When the kids were planning their move their 5 years ago, I was concerned about their safety, but the information I found led me to believe Zambia was one of the "better" African nations as far as conditions in general, including safety.

I think Mr. Trumps assessment is pretty much accurate.