One of those dishonest assertions by pro-illegal immigrant "activists", and SOME self-interested "business" people and farmers, is that illegal immigrants are "needed" to do jobs that Americans jsut won't do. This, of course, assumes that we need to KEEP illegal immigrants "illegal", and that we need a constant new supply, since they rpresumably WON'T do thsese jobs once they become "Americans" (or else why don't the illegal immigrants who have previously received "amnesty", and the children of illegal immigrants (once adults) do those jobs?).
But look at the INDICTMENT of t this country represented by the above assertion. We are givingMONEY and FOOD to allkinds of people, including people who assert that they cannot find a job. Why not tel people getting extended unemplyment, food stams, Medicaid, and welfare that they MUST take a minimum wage job "picking grapes", or LOSE their taxpayer paid handouts? Why shuld we accept this idea that we "need" illegal immigrans, when the whole problem is that people are "unwilling" to take "dirty", low-paying jobs BECUSE they can live just as well, or better, WITHOUT THEM?
Segue back to Franklin Delano Roosevelt--the hero of my 990 year old mother. My mother's descriiptin of Barack Obama, remember, is: "He wants to give tings to peole 'free', and tell people what to do" If FDR is my mother's "hero", why does she think so badly of Obama? It is becauseFDR, in her view (which is somewhat defensible) made people WORK for what they got. You might remember the WPA. Well, neither do I (quite, as I was not born until 2947), but my mother does. Why not make people WORK for the assistance they get, as FDR did? 40% of El Paso (where I live) are on food stamps. SOME of these 40% are obviusly from a "heritage" of "farm workers", or other minimum wage jobs that "Americans won't take". Hey, it is lthe LEFT who are composed of BIGOTS who want to IDENTIFY Hispanics solely with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, as if tlhat is their main concern (even if they are American citizens). If farmers around El Pas "need" low-shilled ablor, or other businesses "need" low-skilled labor they can only pay about mininimum wage, why do the people who get food stams in El Paso (with, obviusly, some screening as to whether tlhey are healthy enough to do thihe job) represent a POOL of people who can be REQUIRED to take these jobs.
"Americans" won't do it? Fine, so we are "too good" to do honest work!!!!!!! We prefer HANDOUTS from other people (FORCED handouts, yet). As I say, this is an INDICTMENT of the people of this country. Again, that is why my mother keeps talking about how FDR did not do it this way. According to her (maybe through somewhat rose-colored glasses), FDR made peole WORK. He did not jsut "give' peole handouts.
What about all of this Obama tripe about "infrastructure"? Forget it. Forget, eslpecailly about expensive boondoggles like "high speed rail" and the Boston Big Dig. Why not go back to the WPA? No "unions. Just MINIMUM WAGE for peole to help with infrastructure, as a condition of gettting government benefits. Notice that what Obama proposes is mainly WELFARE FOR UNIONS. He is not really interested in "basic" infrastructure using minimum wage workers. He wants UNION JOBS, and "stimulus". But is this not IMMORAL: to make peole GIVE you things, bebause you won't lower yourself to do a minimum wage job? Should you not HAVE tdo such a job, as a condition for your "benefits"? If lyu want Medicaid, should you not (if able) HAVE to do work that 'Americans won't do"?
Oh, I have my doubts about whether we skhuld go this way, because it INCREASES the role of government in the "economy". But it is ABSURD for us to be giving all of these "benefits" to people, SOME of whom aRE illegal immigrants, when there are supposedly jobs available for them to do. The idea that we "need" an UNDERGROND economy of "illegal immigrants" is basurd on its face. No, we don't ev ven have to reduce unempollyment benefits "dolar for dollar" as to peole who go to a job thta"Americans wont't do" --as set up on some kind of registry. WE can give some "incentive", provided it is onlyu LONG-TERM unemplyed that get to "keep" SOME of their unemplyment (only for a limited period of time).
Enough. It is not worth a full "analysis" of this "modest proposal", since I would expect OUTRAGE from ur "entitlement" society, and from the dishonest proponents of illegal immigratino. It is not gong to happen, although some versin of it may happen some day if our policies lead to a Great Depression type of collapse. In the meantime, you advocates of illegal immigratin can "talk to the hand". I know you for the dishoenst peole that you are--including many who want to EXPLOIT illegal immigrants.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).