How about partial amnesty for illegals? (case by case basis)

[Ignacio Upton]

I'm not sure if my particular solution is practical, and I'm sure it has flaws, but I believe that it is a better compromise than blanket amnesty or deporting 11 million people with legal children.
Instead of telling all 11 million ilegals "ok, you guys broke the law, but we'll forgive you!" we should only give amnesty to the most productive illegal immigrants. If they are doing well here, have children who were born here legally, or have worked here for ten years of more, then they should be considered for amnesty. However, if they have done any major lawbreaking while in the country, including gang membership, murder, drug dealing, then they should be deported (with exceptions made to criminals with legal kids...they should serve jail time but not deportation.) We should let Juan Seis Paquetas (that's Spanish for "Joe Six-Pack") for his hard work, establishment of extensive roots, and for his family, but we should not reward someone who is a member of MS-13 or deals in cocaine or has committed rape or murder. Anyone who is one of these illegals who has committed a crime of this sort should be thrown out.

[IsItJustMe]

1. The problem is going to get worse and worse no matter what you do. The

people that will be here will still draw their relatives here and you will have milllions more in no time. We're talking third world country within the next 10 to 20 years. I don't know the answer.

[Ignacio Upton]

2. If relatives who are here legally protect their illegal relatives

then they should receivefines and loss of their jobs, or possibly jail time.

[IsItJustMe]

3. I don't know about that, but I have seen several around here lately and I

live in the middle of nowwhere. The folks I saw were homeless and looked like they were on their last leg. That's what we are creating in this country.

[Ignacio Upton]

4. Blame the Mexican govt. and corporations

Vicente Fox is Mexico's version of Bush: a rich stuck up douchebag who enjoys (though Bush is currently trying to create by destroying our safety net) a colonial system of power in the hands of few and massive inequality of wealth, with few safety nets. American corporations exploit these people at the expense of the poor in this country (both white Americans and Americans of color) and s a way to weaken unions.

[napi21]

5. The problem is way to big to do that.

How many decades would it take to even process the 11 million here already, and there would be more coming all the time. You can't do anything on an individual basis with that many people.

I still think the ideal answer is to go after the employers who exploit the illegals. If there are no jobs, I think the problem will slowly disappear. Word would get back to those who wanted to jump the poarder that there's no jobs there so it's not worth the risk.

[benburch]

6. How about Open Borders?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/benburch/4

[Inland]

7. Without adding to the other comments, one of the reasons

that is given for allowing liberal immigration is "because they are poor and if you don't let them in, you are condemning them to poverty". The people giving that argument will never agree to a system that throws out the least productive, because if your not poor, you don't have a reason for immigration. Indeed, that reason for allowing immigration would take the ones who have made money, built homes, set up businesses, and tell them to cash out and go back home and make room for somebody who is still impoverished.