Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Thoughts on Germanys problem with illegal immigration and how it is not tolerated.

There is about 1 million illegals in Germany that if found are deported.

There is no birthright citizen ship.

This talks about their upcoming problems from Africa and other countries.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/germany-expects-up-to-750000-immigrants-in-2015/

What I am wondering is why a socialist country like Germany wants to turn away immigrants in need.

You know that Germany has a conservative lead government? And has had that for 10 years?

Also, your link doesn't work.

Should now

Germany does take more than its fair share of both legal migrants and asylum seekers. There needs to be Europe wide agreement of what migrants and asylum seekers are entitled to in order to stop making some countries more appealing to immigrants than others.

Germany is at least in a strong economic position to shoulder the burden. Greece, who are taking in huge numbers relative to their population are buckling under the numbers due to their economy being in the toilet as well.

I'm moving to Germany.

Who's coming with me?

Already there, brobeans. Meet me in Bardock's house so we can drink all his beer and spezi.

Can you clarify what you mean by birthright citizenship? Children born in Germany generally are German citizens so long as one of their parents has been resident for a while.

Do you mean a system where just being born in the nation, regardless of circumstances or status of parents or even how long you were there, makes you a permanent citizen? If so, I don't think the lack of such an unusual law is something you can say is against socialist principles. It's a rather irrelevant thing to mention. Right or left wing, fully open birthright citizenship is a trait of the new world- i.e. the Americas and is more related to their attempts to populate the nation than any overarching political philosophy.

But in any case, as pointed out, Germany isn't really an example of a socialist country.

Not quite sure I understand your main question either- Germany is exceptionally welcoming to immigrants. It's why they take so many. The concern now is over the high volume and distribution, not the principle.

The big problem with EU immigration right now is that a lot of EU countries signed a legally binding agreement saying the first signed-up nation where an asylum seeker arrives is the country where they will find asylum. But as jaden says, that's doesn't exactly work in nations like Greece who can't possibly manage the influx, and who are now ignoring that law and moving asylum seekers on.

This has wider political ramifications- Germany is talking about altering the EU treaty to adapt to the new situation. The UK has been after treaty change for years to settle its own relationship issues with the EU, including immigration. Most nations have been against going through the hassle of treaty change just to keep the UK happy, but this creates an opening to settle everything.

Illegals found are automatically deported? Wow, well lets be more like Germany in that specific aspect. Anything is better then finding an illegal and saying "meh, you are free to go just pinky swear you won't kill a dude".

Originally posted by Surtur
Illegals found are automatically deported? Wow, well lets be more like Germany in that specific aspect. Anything is better then finding an illegal and saying "meh, you are free to go just pinky swear you won't kill a dude".

In the US it's more "you're free to go. Just pinky swear you'll work for a fraction of what a US citizen would work for so I can make more profits"

Originally posted by jaden101
In the US it's more "you're free to go. Just pinky swear you'll work for a fraction of what a US citizen would work for so I can make more profits"

Isn't it actually both? Though the people letting these illegals go aren't exactly the ones making large profits that I know of.

Originally posted by Surtur
Isn't it actually both? Though the people letting these illegals go aren't exactly the ones making large profits that I know of.

The people making money off the backs of cheap migrant labour don't really care if that migrant goes home and gets shot by another migrant or goes and kills someone so long as it's not them.

The people making the money from undocumented workers also have more power to affect immigration laws than either the immigrants or a normal citizen.

Haven't looked into the US situation but in the UK subsidiaries of large corporations employ huge numbers of illegal workers. Particularly food processing companies.

I would imagine certain sectors of the US service industries wouldn't function profitably without illegal immigrants.

I think we can all agree that Germany is inferior to the land of the Free and the home of the Brave in every conceivable way. Especially in fast food dining options.

I second the last part.

Originally posted by jaden101
The people making money off the backs of cheap migrant labour don't really care if that migrant goes home and gets shot by another migrant or goes and kills someone so long as it's not them.

You could say the same about the people who decided to release these people even though they are illegal.



This is why I've said we need to target these people as well. They need to pay people a fair wage so people here legally can work. But it doesn't excuse any type of violent action by illegals just because they have to work hard for shit pay. If they didn't want that they shouldn't of come here.



And there in lies a big problem, we need a to find a way to where we are not so dependent on illegals to do our jobs. I'm not saying the illegal citizens are the only problem in this entire mess, we have some greedy ass people here who help continue the cycle.

Originally posted by Surtur
. But it doesn't excuse any type of violent action by illegals just because they have to work hard for shit pay. If they didn't want that they shouldn't of come here.



The problem is you're bundling the ones who come to work and do jobs for shit pay and conditions with ones who come to engage in criminal activity. I'm sure there are those who cross the border to join Hispanic gangs and get involved in violent crimes and drug trafficking etc but they will be vastly outnumbered by those who just want to work. Isn't that what America was built on, after all? Immigrants carving out a niche for themselves and making a better life? Each of the immigrant communities brought their own nefarious element as well. The Italians, the Irish, Russian, Chinese. It's strange that some are now almost celebrated as part of the American zeitgeist and others not. Their bad contingent are also always overwhelmingly outnumbered by law abiding people not just doing jobs many people wouldn't do but creating businesses as well. And a lot of them will have been 1st generation illegals or now descended from illegals.

Originally posted by Slay
I think we can all agree that Germany is inferior to the land of the Free and the home of the Brave in every conceivable way. Especially in fast food dining options.

They sell expensive cars.

Originally posted by Bentley
They sell expensive cars.
They're not that expensive in Germany. I could say the same for American cars. If I wanted to get a Mustang, it would cost me a shit-ton more than it would in the US.

Originally posted by jaden101
The problem is you're bundling the ones who come to work and do jobs for shit pay and conditions with ones who come to engage in criminal activity. I'm sure there are those who cross the border to join Hispanic gangs and get involved in violent crimes and drug trafficking etc but they will be vastly outnumbered by those who just want to work. Isn't that what America was built on, after all? Immigrants carving out a niche for themselves and making a better life? Each of the immigrant communities brought their own nefarious element as well. The Italians, the Irish, Russian, Chinese. It's strange that some are now almost celebrated as part of the American zeitgeist and others not. Their bad contingent are also always overwhelmingly outnumbered by law abiding people not just doing jobs many people wouldn't do but creating businesses as well. And a lot of them will have been 1st generation illegals or now descended from illegals.

I just think the "America was built on this" is frankly outdated and just not as practical as it once was. Plus nobody is saying ban all immigration..or at least not me. I am all for legal immigration, I think America was built on that if you want to talk about America, it wasn't built for people to come in illegally and take jobs away from legal citizens by working for shit pay..thus allowing greedy ass people here to exploit them even more and thus it spreads and more and more places adopt those practices.

I am not saying every single illegal is a criminal, what I'm saying is I don't think allowing illegals to stay so they can have a better life is more important then protecting legal American citizens from any criminal element that might come in, EVEN if that element only represents a small amount of the total illegals, the taking of even one life because of this is utterly unacceptable. We have enough legal citizens committing crime, we don't need more. Especially when we have ANY city in this country willing to release these people and not deport them.

You frankly also don't get to call people whose very presence here is breaking the law.."law abiding" people because they are not abiding by the friggin law just by being here. You can say a majority aren't out raping and killing, but none of them are law abiding.

Originally posted by Surtur
I just think the "America was built on this" is frankly outdated and just not as practical as it once was. Plus nobody is saying ban all immigration..or at least not me. I am all for legal immigration, I think America was built on that if you want to talk about America, it wasn't built for people to come in illegally and take jobs away from legal citizens by working for shit pay..thus allowing greedy ass people here to exploit them even more and thus it spreads and more and more places adopt those practices.

I am not saying every single illegal is a criminal, what I'm saying is I don't think allowing illegals to stay so they can have a better life is more important then protecting legal American citizens from any criminal element that might come in, EVEN if that element only represents a small amount of the total illegals, the taking of even one life because of this is utterly unacceptable. We have enough legal citizens committing crime, we don't need more. Especially when we have ANY city in this country willing to release these people and not deport them.

You frankly also don't get to call people whose very presence here is breaking the law.."law abiding" people because they are not abiding by the friggin law just by being here. You can say a majority aren't out raping and killing, but none of them are law abiding. If you;re using such a strict definition for law abiding there probably aren't any law abiding citizens in this country. Because if you're definition of a law abiding citizen is any who is not breaking any law then I'm sure based on statistics there are none. Why because people litter, J-Walk, speed even if it only five miles above the speed limit, and etc.

Originally posted by Newjak
If you;re using such a strict definition for law abiding there probably aren't any law abiding citizens in this country. Because if you're definition of a law abiding citizen is any who is not breaking any law then I'm sure based on statistics there are none. Why because people litter, J-Walk, speed even if it only five miles above the speed limit, and etc.

Plus I bet lots of ppl here pirate some form of media (games/movies/music/comics).

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Plus I bet lots of ppl here pirate some form of media (games/movies/music/comics). Exactly so I think what people here could agree there are ranges of what we consider to be good law abiding citizens which to me are the ones that only commit minor crimes from time to time. Of course we probably all have some more of what we would consider minor crime.

Originally posted by Newjak
If you;re using such a strict definition for law abiding there probably aren't any law abiding citizens in this country. Because if you're definition of a law abiding citizen is any who is not breaking any law then I'm sure based on statistics there are none. Why because people litter, J-Walk, speed even if it only five miles above the speed limit, and etc.

I don't find those things quite the same though. People are not littering 24/7, not jay walking 24/7, not speeding 24/7. I'm just saying, for me I'd just phrase it like saying a majority of them don't rape or kill. Problem is, as long as even a small amount of them do that..there is a problem.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Can you clarify what you mean by birthright citizenship? Children born in Germany generally are German citizens so long as one of their parents has been resident for a while.

Do you mean a system where just being born in the nation, regardless of circumstances or status of parents or even how long you were there, makes you a permanent citizen? If so, I don't think the lack of such an unusual law is something you can say is against socialist principles. It's a rather irrelevant thing to mention. Right or left wing, fully open birthright citizenship is a trait of the new world- i.e. the Americas and is more related to their attempts to populate the nation than any overarching political philosophy.

But in any case, as pointed out, Germany isn't really an example of a socialist country.

Not quite sure I understand your main question either- Germany is exceptionally welcoming to immigrants. It's why they take so many. The concern now is over the high volume and distribution, not the principle.

The big problem with EU immigration right now is that a lot of EU countries signed a legally binding agreement saying the first signed-up nation where an asylum seeker arrives is the country where they will find asylum. But as jaden says, that's doesn't exactly work in nations like Greece who can't possibly manage the influx, and who are now ignoring that law and moving asylum seekers on.

This has wider political ramifications- Germany is talking about altering the EU treaty to adapt to the new situation. The UK has been after treaty change for years to settle its own relationship issues with the EU, including immigration. Most nations have been against going through the hassle of treaty change just to keep the UK happy, but this creates an opening to settle everything.

Sure what I mean by birthright citizens ship is easy to clarify. What I mean is if you are a foreigner legal or illegal you do not get citizenship based on being born in the country. This is stark contrast to America.

So based on birth and no other factor. As I mentioned, that's a trait of the new world rather than any political attitude. Do you really connect not having such a law as being intolerant of immigrants?

Until not too long ago, if you were born of foreign parents in Germany you were allowed dual citizenship until the age of 23, at which time you had to choose between German citizenship or that of the country from which your parents came. If your parents were from an EU-country you were allowed to have dual citizenship anyway.

I think they changed it somewhat, not too long ago. Though I'm not sure, I think everyone born of foreign parents is now allowed to hold dual citizenship whether their parents are from a EU country or not. This was mostly to appease Germany's large Turkish population.

This map is very telling- the countries in black are the ones that have automatic citizenship based on birthright and no other factor:

http://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2010/birthright-map-big.jpg

As you can see, it is all focussed on the New World- places with a specific need, after European colonisation, to increase citizenship. It was never to do with political attitude, just practicality. Right or left wing, no matter just where you are in the world.

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't find those things quite the same though. People are not littering 24/7, not jay walking 24/7, not speeding 24/7. I'm just saying, for me I'd just phrase it like saying a majority of them don't rape or kill. Problem is, as long as even a small amount of them do that..there is a problem. Which is fair and I agree when you have a subset of a group committing rapes and murders it is always a problem. But to me the problem are the ones committing the violent crimes.

My concern is that you seem to be wanting to hold the entire group responsible for the actions of a few individuals.

I think that is a bit unfair considering almost any group coming to the United States whether legally or illegally will have close to the same chance of a subgroup committing violent crimes. Legal immigrants, for instance, have similar chances of killing American citizens when they enter this country. The same with tourists just visiting this country. There is a chance of them committing a violent crime against a US citizen.

So I find it hard to say that we understand and accept the risk from those groups while trying to condemn an entire group based solely on the odds of them committing violent crimes against US citizens. Unless we are talking like a Cartel/Mob/Criminal Organization group whose entire concept is based on committing violent/dangerous crimes. But the vast majority of illegals don't fall under those categories.

Most illegals would condemn the actions of violent offenders doing violent things. So why is it acceptable to say if even one illegal would commit a violent crime then we should do a better job deporting and getting rid of all of them when we don't hold other foreign visitors/transients to the same standards? As in if you hurt an American Citizen all of you are going to pay.

Well I think we should hold foreign visitors to the same standards in all honesty. We need to be more mindful or who we let in this country.

I want to say I am not condemning them. I'm rather saying what I said before: I think this is about quality of life vs actual life.

It is unfortunate, but I guess the best way to describe it is..have you ever been in school and one or two people in class were misbehaving and the teacher punished the entire class for it? Or been on a sports team and one guy messes around and the coach gives everyone extra laps?

I will flat out tell you I realize this is not fair..I just feel we have enough problems and crime without adding anymore. Also remember one of my main issues with this stems from the sanctuary cities. I'd perhaps have a different view if they were gotten rid of. I want to at least know if they pick up an illegal criminal(don't care if it's even petty crime like weed) they will not just release this person back on the streets.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
So based on birth and no other factor. As I mentioned, that's a trait of the new world rather than any political attitude. Do you really connect not having such a law as being intolerant of immigrants?

Does the UK have birth right citizenship?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Does the UK have birth right citizenship?

Ush provided a map where you can check. I could tell you, but why spoil the surprise.

http://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2010/birthright-map-big.jpg

No, although it did until relatively recently (the 80s).

So no one really does this in Europe any more and our two biggest allies do not.

And the US actually does.

Which makes me wonder why people on this forum are hard on US immigration when we are the easiest country in the world to immigrate to.

The US is not the easiest country to immigrate to by a long shot. It does have birthright citizenship, which, like Ush said, comes from its history. To be honest it is a big part in what makes America great, the American dream, that a poor child of immigrants can become a billionaire, or a great scientist, or the president....but if you want to shit on that American greatness, that's cool too.

Originally posted by Bardock42
The US is not the easiest country to immigrate to by a long shot. It does have birthright citizenship, which, like Ush said, comes from its history. To be honest it is a big part in what makes America great, the American dream, that a poor child of immigrants can become a billionaire, or a great scientist, or the president....but if you want to shit on that American greatness, that's cool too.


Ah see, the kicker and bitterness is at the end, which always comes out.

You say America is the easiest and greatest on immigration. We agree.

Where we disagree is that your country is relatively solid because your country does not have entitlements to immigrants like we do here.

You want US to open our borders to everyone who wants to come regardless of laws, criminal backgrounds and open our programs for our own citizens who have worked for them for a lifetime, and then let the immigrants who come illegally reap the benefits of the immigrants who came here legally years ago and now have such as social security, Medicaid/care, health coverage etc.

Our system can not handle it.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Ah see, the kicker and bitterness is at the end, which always comes out.

You say America is the easiest and greatest on immigration. We agree.

Where we disagree is that your country is relatively solid because your country does not have entitlements to immigrants like we do here.

You want US to open our borders to everyone who wants to come regardless of laws, criminal backgrounds and open our programs for our own citizens who have worked for them for a lifetime, and then let the immigrants who come illegally reap the benefits of the immigrants who came here legally years ago and now have such as social security, Medicaid/care, health coverage etc.

Our system can not handle it. Except he did not say the US is the easiest or greatest on immigration. I'm pretty sure he said the exact opposite of that.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So no one really does this in Europe any more and our two biggest allies do not.

And the US actually does.

Which makes me wonder why people on this forum are hard on US immigration when we are the easiest country in the world to immigrate to.
Not for adults.

Who cares? You can come here illegally. And have a baby and get citizenship.

What about all the people that come legally and wait and pay for, Screw them right?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Who cares? You can come here illegally. And have a baby and get citizenship.

What about all the people that come legally and wait and pay for, Screw them right?

Woah, no, the baby will get citizenship, it can be a pathway for the parents to get lawful residency, but they don't get citizenship automatically.

That's my point..we have easier immigration then most country's.

You keep trying to prove we don't.

That's just one aspect of immigration though, it doesn't prove that immigration overall is easier.

That's a huge aspect and a easy way to citizenship. How much easier should we make it?

Cross the border and get your social security as you cross from a vending machine with water and food?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Who cares? You can come here illegally. And have a baby and get citizenship.

What about all the people that come legally and wait and pay for, Screw them right?
I know people who've gone that route, and I imagine "screw them" is about what they think the immigration people are saying behind closed doors with how much bullshit they have to go through.

Illegal immigration is a massive problem because of how crappy our legal immigration is.

So we build a wall to fix the leeks then have massive immigration reform.

The wall would be a pointless endeavour. I guess it would give illegal immigrants jobs, so maybe not completely pointless. Massive immigration reform sounds really good though.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So we build a wall to fix the leeks then have massive immigration reform. Why don't we just use money and time it would take building the wall into fixing immigration reform first?

Originally posted by Bardock42
The wall would be a pointless endeavour. I guess it would give illegal immigrants jobs, so maybe not completely pointless. Massive immigration reform sounds really good though.

Still does not stop any and everyone who wants to here. Even with the most massive change in policy, there will still be law breakers.

How can a country be called a country without securing its borders?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Still does not stop any and everyone who wants to here. Even with the most massive change in policy, there will still be law breakers.

How can a country be called a country without securing its borders?
Borders don't mean that no one and nothing can get through without the country's authorities knowing. That's a silly, unreasonable standard for any country.

America has secure borders by international standards. Even if we were to erect a mountainous, impenetrable wall along the Mexican border, people would just come in boats. If the Mediterranean Sea can't keep migrants out of Europe, a wall won't keep them out of America.

A wall will do better then no wall.

It's like saying

"My computer runs better and is more secure without security firewalls, then ones that do."

We already have lots of border fences across most of our border with Mexico where it's feasible to build them. Have you thought about how difficult it would be to secure border cities?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
A wall will do better then no wall.

It's like saying

"My computer runs better and is more secure without security firewalls, then ones that do."
That's a bad comparison. How many countries can you point to that have the sort of border defenses that you're advocating?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That's a bad comparison. How many countries can you point to that have the sort of border defenses that you're advocating?

I can think of one, it also fits very well in this thread, albeit a bit outdated.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That's a bad comparison. How many countries can you point to that have the sort of border defenses that you're advocating?

It was a great comparison you are downplaying it.

We advertise for people to come here.

Your avoiding the issue.

Does Germany promise citizenship and entitlement for immigrants?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMvcdFZU8AAi4_y.jpg

But since when has she been relevant in this discussion, pretty easy when you border Canada.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
It was a great comparison you are downplaying it.

We advertise for people to come here.

Your avoiding the issue.

Does Germany promise citizenship and entitlement for immigrants?
It's a terrible comparison because you're suggesting that the United States has abnormally low border security when the opposite is true. Most borders in the world are either porous and poorly controlled (ex: Afghanistan-Pakistan, Syria-Iraq, most African countries) or peaceful and relaxed (ex: US-Canadian border, borders in Europe). Borders that do have serious defenses are rare, and generally crop up in countries with dictatorships, or in critical points like Melilla or Gibraltar.

I'm not an expert in German immigration, nor did I pretend to be. I'm only discussing our immigration policy, since that's the ulterior angle of this thread.

Of coarse they do not, neither does Mexico or any European country.

Even our constitution is vague on it, and points to no one should be allowed citizenship based on a law broken.

What other system in the world rewards a gold nugget for robbing the bank?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
It's a terrible comparison because you're suggesting that the United States has abnormally low border security when the opposite is true. Most borders in the world are either porous and poorly controlled (ex: Afghanistan-Pakistan, Syria-Iraq, most African countries) or peaceful and relaxed (ex: US-Canadian border, borders in Europe). Borders that do have serious defenses are rare, and generally crop up in countries with dictatorships, or in critical points like Melilla or Gibraltar.

I'm not an expert in German immigration, nor did I pretend to be. I'm only discussing our immigration policy, since that's the ulterior angle of this thread.

So when did Bardock become an expert in U.S. Immigration? Your just as smart as him, it's not that hard to read about German immigration laws.

Not even Mexico offers citizenship to Americans unless you go through a 5 year process and pay a ton of money.

Why should people here, break the law and get a kid born here and then have all the rights as an American Citizen?

Does Mexico treat Americans well?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So when did Bardock become an expert in U.S. Immigration? Your just as smart as him, it's not that hard to read about German immigration laws.

Not even Mexico offers citizenship to Americans unless you go through a 5 year process and pay a ton of money.

Why should people here, break the law and get a kid born here and then have all the rights as an American Citizen?

Does Mexico treat Americans well?
As has been pointed out before, birthright citizenship came about long before the notion of Mexican immigration to America was an issue.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'does Mexico treat Americans well?' Do you mean the Mexican government, the Mexican people? I know you like to focus on a few cases where Americans run afoul of Mexican corruption and ignore all the hundreds of thousands of Americans who vacation in Mexico without serious trouble.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So when did Bardock become an expert in U.S. Immigration? Your just as smart as him, it's not that hard to read about German immigration laws.


I wouldn't say I am an expert either. I assume I have read more about U.S. immigration than OV about German immigration, if alone because it's a much less discussed issue.

Maybe we should look at the root of the problem? Are we doing anything to try to make Mexico a place where the citizens actually don't want to flee to another country?

Originally posted by Surtur
Maybe we should look at the root of the problem? Are we doing anything to try to make Mexico a place where the citizens actually don't want to flee to another country?

No, actually the US is doing the opposite by enabling extreme crime through the "war on drugs".

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, actually the US is doing the opposite by enabling extreme crime through the "war on drugs".

It's like this country never learns from its mistakes. Prohibition apparently didn't teach them the lesson it should have. Not to mention the epic failure of the "war" on drugs.

People say the USA has never lost a war? We have.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's like this country never learns from its mistakes. Prohibition apparently didn't teach them the lesson it should have.

By "them" you mean your government?

Originally posted by Bardock42
By "them" you mean your government?

Yes, sorry about that looking at it now I should of phrased it differently.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
As has been pointed out before, birthright citizenship came about long before the notion of Mexican immigration to America was an issue.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'does Mexico treat Americans well?' Do you mean the Mexican government, the Mexican people? I know you like to focus on a few cases where Americans run afoul of Mexican corruption and ignore all the hundreds of thousands of Americans who vacation in Mexico without serious trouble.

The 14th Amendment is being abused and was never intended for the the purpose of illegal immigration, it was for slaves.

Sounds like some of these amendments need amending..

Originally posted by Surtur
Sounds like some of these amendments need amending..

Or they just need to be read correctly.

The framers never had it in their mind or would have thought the politicians and liberals to let in illegal immigrants and grant them citizenship to their kids, then subsequently.

I do find it funny how we cling to some rules that are f*cking centuries old without taking into account the vast changes that have occurred since they were made.

It's like finding a centuries old piece of food and thinking "must still totally be good to eat".

Originally posted by Surtur
I do find it funny how we cling to some rules that are f*cking centuries old without taking into account the vast changes that have occurred since they were made.

It's like finding a centuries old piece of food and thinking "must still totally be good to eat".

People cite the constitution to support their position, and deny it's applicability when it disagrees with them all the time.

Originally posted by Bardock42
People cite the constitution to support their position, and deny it's applicability when it disagrees with them all the time.




Yep...and the overwhelming majority of the time it's liberals who do that.

Originally posted by Star428
Yep...and the overwhelming majority of the time it's liberals who do that.

It's both sides, really everyone. Conservatives in particular talk big about how they believe in the constitution, until it disagrees with their opinions, which makes it somewhat more hypocritical, but really it's everyone.

Originally posted by Bardock42
People cite the constitution to support their position, and deny it's applicability when it disagrees with them all the time.

The 14th amendment was not intended nor does it state 'illegal immigrants get citizenship"

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The 14th amendment was not intended nor does it state 'illegal immigrants get citizenship"

You are right that it doesn't state "all illegal immigrants", it states "all persons"...

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The 14th amendment was not intended nor does it state 'illegal immigrants get citizenship"
Well, legally they're not illegal immigrants if they're born on US soil.

If I were to overhaul the immigration system, I'd make it such that citizenship isn't earned through a long drawnout bureaucratic process but by simply living in America according to American laws and paying taxes for a certain probationary period (let's say 5 years). Instead of trying to stop people from crossing the border through dangerous means like coyotes, we could have registration centers at the border similar to how refugees are handled coming from warzones. If the immigrants aren't afraid to step out into the light, it might be easier to keep track of them.

Probably lots of problems with such a plan though.

Anyways back on topic.

Not only does Germany not allow birth right citizens, they deport anyone they find.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Anyways back on topic.

Not only does Germany not allow birth right citizens, they deport anyone they find.

Interesting. Sounds cool.


How does that affect their low-paying low-skilled labor area of industry?

Are they hurting for those types of workers?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Interesting. Sounds cool.


How does that affect their low-paying low-skilled labor area of industry?

Are they hurting for those types of workers?
I think Germany has had a large influx of Polish immigrants since Poland's entry into the EU in 2004 that mostly do the kind of work you're referring to.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Interesting. Sounds cool.


How does that affect their low-paying low-skilled labor area of industry?

Are they hurting for those types of workers?

They have to hide and a lot can't work..

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
They have to hide and a lot can't work..

Oh, like illegal immigrants in the US?


Also, I think you're answering a question DDM didn't ask.

Originally posted by Slay
Oh, like illegal immigrants in the US?


Also, I think you're answering a question DDM didn't ask.

Maybe, I think you are responding to a post I didn't direct to you.

So be gone troll.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Maybe, I think you are responding to a post I didn't direct to you.

So be gone troll.
I think I'm allowed to respond to a post I take issue with, whether it's directed to me or not. That's kind of the whole point of a forum like this, big fella.

Awe bless, can't read what you said.