Indentured Servitude

[SpurNation]

No. We need better control of the border, and a legal pathway for the cheap labor business demands.

Agreed. and...My suggestion offers a legal pathway for cheap labor all the while generating tax revenue as well. Current system doesn't do that.

Only if I let you do the talking for me. Fat chance of that.

Oh ...I know that. And I wouldn't respect you as I do if you did.

Indentured servitude leads to slavery. Holders of the indenture will abuse it. It's in their direct economic interest to do so.

I could see this if it were up to individuals or corporations. This would be different being a government program for illegals that would prevent such an event.

It's also contrary to the customary freedom inhabitants of the USA have enjoyed for quite some time, but I can see that troubles you little. It's a big reason others want to come here, and a justifiable point of pride for Americans. You'd like to change that.

You're en led to your opinion, just as I'm en led to say it's not too well thought out and un-American to boot.

As I respect your views...don't put words in my mouth either.

"Un-American". Wrong. My ancestors paid the price for coming to this country. They didn't have anything "GIVEN" to them. They paid prices like all our ancestors before us.

Most illegals in our country now are living in poverty conditions much worse than we can imagine. I've seen the conditions in which many of them live. Such conditions that warrant and expedite health care problems. Just allowing them to become legal immigrants wouldn't change that status. Indenturing would at least allow them to live in government housing that offers better conditions than the slum lord lots they now reside.

Tell me...what's so American about living in the conditions many illegals are forced to live in now?

I wish you would look at all the language I have submitted instead of singling out just that you disagree.

I am open to suggestions and debate...but not all I've said is as calus as your suggesting.

Again...at least I try to offer suggestion. So many (not you) in this forum only offer hate and ridicule. Talking about un-American.

[Winehole23]

I could see this if it were up to individuals or corporations. This would be different being a government program for illegals that would prevent such an event.

I am even less sanguine about leaving indentured servitude in the government's hands than business's. That would be an even worse policy IMO.

"Un-American". Wrong. My ancestors paid the price for coming to this country. They didn't have anything "GIVEN" to them. They paid prices like all our ancestors before us.

Not sure what you're driving at. I was talking about the freedom anyone walking around in a free country enjoys. Indentured servitude would change that. I'm not sure how the bad old days justify it.

Most illegals in our country now are living in poverty conditions much worse than we can imagine. I've seen the conditions in which many of them live. Such conditions that warrant and expedite health care problems. Just allowing them to become legal immigrants wouldn't change that status. Indenturing would at least allow them to live in government housing that offers better conditions than the slum lord lots they now reside.

Government run warrens for indentured labor? I wonder how this will go over. Doesn't sound very compassionate to me.

Tell me...what's so American about living in the conditions many illegals are forced to live in now?

Forced? I've heard of this happening in the agricultural context. In Florida and various other places. Mostly, immigrant labor in the USA is free to go wherever it wants. I'm not too sure the example you've picked is very representative.

Again...at least I try to offer suggestion. So many (not you) in this forum only offer hate and ridicule. Talking about un-American.

I think indentured servitude is un-American and against traditional US values. That doesn't make you un-American -- I just think the idea is, and was holding that up for ridicule.

I don't really doubt your personal bona fides, SpursNation; but I do think your suggestion is pretty messed up.

[LnGrrrR]

WH23, I think he's viewing it more as a "Peace Corps" type initiative. I'm assuming you'd have the same objections?

[Winehole23]

WH23, I think he's viewing it more as a "Peace Corps" type initiative. I'm assuming you'd have the same objections?

Make the case. SpursNation hasn't.

I do have a problem with indentured servitude as a premise; I doubt rejiggering the government provided amenities and guarantees would change that.

[Marcus Bryant]

Some would say you should be able to sell yourself into slavery. Some would argue you have in this 24/7/365 Crackberry world. Anyways, yes, it would be preferable to not resuscitate indentured servitude.

[Winehole23]

Some would say you should be able to sell yourself into slavery. Some would argue you have in this 24/7/365 Crackberry world.

This point is untrivial. We can limit our own freedom by contract or by default. If we fail to assert our liberties, or to fight the attempts to deprive us of them, we lose them.

[SpurNation]

Make the case. SpursNation hasn't.

I do have a problem with indentured servitude as a premise; I doubt rejiggering the government provided amenities and guarantees would change that.

I'm not in favor of illegals being granted legal status for nothing either. My ancestors and many of the now naturalized American citizens paid too great a price for that privelage.

Indentured Servitude as you remember it is not what I'm suggesting either... and have stated so in this thread.

You have vaild reasons because of the past regarding the suggestion...I respect your concern in that regard...but to say as fact it would be the same in a better controlled environment is as benign as saying it wouldn't.

I would glady accept suggestion from your point of view as to solve this issue as I would anyone elses.

That's what I like to do as an American. I'm tired of the bickering, finger pointing and ridicule without suggestion. That's how things get done...suggestion.

Bickering and ridicule only leads to more havoc and partisan bias.

Again...I respect your opinion WH23. Your intelligence and eloquence with the English language would allow someone like you to be able to make more of a difference (something happen) than somebody of my stature.

[Winehole23]

Indentured Servitude as you remember it is not what I'm suggesting either... and have stated so in this thread.

I thought it was. The conditions you attached to it didn't change the premise that much for me. By bad if I misunderstood you. Would you care to clarify your current position?

You have vaild reasons because of the past regarding the suggestion...I respect your concern in that regard...but to say as fact it would be the same in a better controlled environment is as benign as saying it wouldn't.

I guess we disagree about the prudence of having a publicly subsidized, government-run indentured labor scheme. It doesn't sound benign to me, having the government define and control a class of unfree workers.

That's what I like to do as an American. I'm tired of the bickering, finger pointing and ridicule without suggestion. That's how things get done...suggestion.

Bickering and ridicule only leads to more havoc and partisan bias.

I couldn't agree more.

It's impolite to ridicule people, but I wouldn't say the same about ideas.

I take it you're in agreement now that indentured servitude is a bad idea. Are you?

Again...I respect your opinion WH23. Your intelligence and eloquence with the English language would allow someone like you to be able to make more of a difference (something happen) than somebody of my stature.

Eh, I'm not so sure about that. We're all jockeys of the keyboard on a current events board. All not-too-suitably placed to effect change IMO, though I appreciate the compliment.

[SpurNation]

I'm just looking for suggestions as I have posted mine.

Suggestions for a change would be great instead of partisan bickering.

As far as "servitude" as defined in the past...I don't agree with that. But something along the line of "res ution" and or "payment" for the right to be in this country would be more appreciated from my point of view than just having citizenship granted without sacrifice.

That would be a disservice to our ancestors , military personnel and all the people who have taken the "legal" route to naturalization.

And for Obama to suggest we just "legalize" illegal immigrants is beyond comprehension on my part. Especially when so many others have sacrificed so much more to be a citizen of this country.

If we are to just throw our hands up and say "Oh Well" they're here anyway...at least something should be done IMO..to justify and rectify the idea of illegal alliens to become legal.

I don't think some of my points are that off base if it could be done without Indentured Servitude.

Suggestions?

[mogrovejo]

Anyways, since immigration and the language have arisen, it's time for a few observations.

First, illegal immigration often serves as the justification for good ol' Americans to explain their failures in life. What better bogeyman for white collar workers to employ than Raul and Jose who will work for pay when it's 105 Fahrenheit out, digging ditches? Obviously the professional class is in the crosshairs as you can pick up any illegal off the street and they can put in a solid 12 hours down at the local law or engineering firm. Lest we forget that it's often the professional class who is hiring illegals.

Secondly, yes, illegals cost the taxpayer through their use of public services. Further use will cost the taxpayers more. Currently illegals contribute less than they use in public services, yet the professional class wants them here.

Thirdly, we're all immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Some free, some not. In any event, the public services immigrants enjoy today are far greater than what was offered way back when. Also, those immigrants did maintain a separate ethnic and national iden y, contrary to current whitewashing.

Fourth, illegal means illegal. There's no other way to sugarcoat it into some kind of politically correct, mealy mouth interpretation. Illegals are here because they benefit those who shape laws and politicians.

Finally, additional immigration would not be a problem for this country if it didn't seek to offer public cradle to grave care, and if we didn't have this latent fear of population growth in our society.

Yeps. Good post. The only part I disagree is this one: "Illegals are here because they benefit those who shape laws and politicians". Illegals are there because there are jobs available for them and public services to free-ride.

[Winehole23]

But something along the line of "res ution" and or "payment" for the right to be in this country would be more appreciated from my point of view than just having citizenship granted without sacrifice.

Has this even been proposed?

[boutons_deux]

"this even been proposed?"

MN said he would have illegals pay a fine for breaking the law, then get in line behind legal applicants for work visas or residency permits. iow, MN is not proposing amnesty.

Immigration knife fight in 2010. Repugs will be ready, will MN?

[SpurNation]

Has this even been proposed?

Good point. Citizenship is definately different than legal status.

I would be concerned it would lead to that without the sacrifices made by those in the past. And legalizing illegals just to "legalize" would still be disservicing those who took the "legal" route in the past.

[Wild Cobra]

If someone wants to allow illegals in, let them take care of them. Just that simple. Make them pay for their health care costs, housing, etc. No federal money to help out.

Let the people put their money where their mouth is. If that means they now have an indentured servant. So be it.