Regarding to the video, I believe that all three speakers have made good points from their perspective of open boarders for immigration. In the results of the debate it would seem that two of the speakers are sided on pro open boarders for immigration. Hence, the third speaker is against the idea of open boarder for immigration. The third speaker that was oppose to the idea of open boarder for immigration, have even stated out before his speech that this debate was two against one. Hence, the debate really bought out some interesting ideas, opinions and points of each speaker’s overview on the immigration policy and open boarder. The debate have three well-known guest speakers: Bryan Caplan, Mark Krikorian, and Alex Nowrasteh. Bryan and Alex
1. The essay’s thesis is, “that we can have an immigration policy that both strengthens our borders and welcomes immigrants.”. In my own words I would restate it as, “Our country should have a better system with letting immigrants with good intensions into our country, and the treats outside of our country, while never discriminating any immigrants.”. 2.
In times such as now, immigration policy is a topic of controversial and emotional discussion. The key in having educational, progressive, and prosperous conversations is understanding the theoretical foundations behind the argument that a person stands for or believes in. Having factual evidence to support ideas on concepts such as: the opportunities that immigrants bring to a country, what the international rules actually are that govern the entry and exit of people from one country to another, and the causes, trends, and consequences of international immigration. Finding reason and support for these claims can take the discussion behind immigration policy from one of heated and emotional argument to one of educational and beneficial conversation.
The author, John H. Barnhill, holds a Ph. D. in American History from Oklahoma State University. His purpose in writing this article is to help assist the responsibilities the legislation holds in order to acknowledge immigrants to stay in the United States. The intended audience would be immigrants concerned in the current condition on the U.S.- Mexican borders. The source overall discusses the various ways people can immigrate to the United States; asylum or illegally. Background history regarding immigration is provided to help develop a better understanding on the effects it has on American society.
Response to “Our Fear of Immigrants” In “Our Fear of Immigrants” Jeremy Adam Smith takes a neutral stance on the immigration and anti-immigration argument. Smith begins by telling the story of a 4th grade class at Jefferson Elementary School in Berkeley, California who try to fight back against immigration laws after a classmate of theirs was deported back to his home country. Smith then goes on to compare the 4th graders to the adults of their town who fight for stronger immigration laws asking his readers what qualities the children possess that the rest of the citizens do not to make them react so differently.
Recent events in the past decade has cause many people to portrayed immigrants as terrorists, illegal immigrants, gang affiliated members, drug dealers, etc. This raises questions regarding closing the border or limiting the number of people that can migrate to America. Politicians and law makers are too concerned about this matter and had propose solutions and issue laws in attempt to stop foreigners from coming to America. However, as both sides pushes for their ideas on the issue, it is ultimately up to the younger generation to decide the future of immigrants living in America.
Immigration reform has been a big issue for our country in recent years. Many U.S. citizens claim that immigration is harmful to the US economy. In just 20 years, we have seen the average number of immigrants per year jump a staggering 20%. This has lead to the biased opinions we see towards immigration today. Currently, our country is not receiving any benefit from immigration. The number of minimum wage jobs available have decreased but so have the number of professional jobs. This is due to the fact that immigrants usually do not have a middle class with average skills. They are either refugees escaping their country hoping for the U.S. government to help them out or they are highly skilled and trained professionals needed by the United States. This has led to an economic
Each response is influenced by individual race, gender, and ethnicity. Despite immigration’s necessity to this, Jacob G. Hornberger’s “Keep the Borders Open” in which he argues the case of keeping borders always open “for people traveling inside the United States but also for people traveling or moving to the United States” is not correct (Hornberger, Jacob G. 1). Having open borders prohibits unity and dissolves individual identity; it also breeds anarchy within a nation. There must be order within a country and allowing everyone into an area strains resources, while no security creates chaos and mass terror. With open borders and thus overpopulation, a country will be unable to uphold its beliefs and will fall to disparities within social class, old prejudices, and government corruption.
Immigration is a huge topic in the news right now, many people have different views on immigrants which is why our country is having issues deciding on how they should be treated. The impact of immigrants on our country is viewed as both positive and negative. Some people believe a wall should be built around the border prevent people from coming in illegally, while others believe anyone should be allowed to start a new life in our country. Although some people do come into this country illegally and cause trouble, the positives outweigh the negatives. Immigrants help strengthen America through their hard work and talents, they also contribute their diverse cultures enriching the country, and have a positive impact on the economy. I think
After September 11, they sealed the border, built a wall, and began persecuting immigrants and justified it as a problem of security. This perspective became an excuse for everything,” said Sandra Rodriguez, an investigative reporter for Ciudad Juarez’s largest newspaper El Diario. The border and immigration are hot button issues in American politics. Brought up in speeches by candidates from all sides of the aisle and can easily factor into a successful campaign.
Robert F. Kennedy once said that “Our attitude towards immigration reflects our faith in the American ideal. We have always believed it possible for men and women who start at the bottom to rise as far as the talent and energy allow. Neither race nor place of birth should affect their chances.” (Source: Dream Act). In American history, immigration started as when immigrants to depart their homeland for the reason that diseases, lack opportunities, and given freedom so forth. With this purpose in mind considering The United States says this is a “land of opportunity” thus, the US should still continue to give immigrants a chance to make their lives better and have the equal right as any native Americans. Throughout the decades, immigrants have been thought of as somewhat poor, but the bottom of
In this year’s hotly contested US presidential campaign, Mexican immigrants are being painted as mooches spilling over our southern border. According to one candidate, they are such a problem that a massive concrete wall must be erected to keep them out. Reality is much different. Indeed, the inflow of Mexican immigrants today is a small fraction of what it once was, off nearly 90 percent from its peak in the year 2000. Net migration from Mexico is actually negative, regardless all the bloviating about in campaign speeches.
The anti-immigration rhetoric in U.S. politics is becoming more relevant in the media, academia, and most importantly, in legislation. By looking at legislation and scholarly research, the history of anti-immigration rhetoric is traced back to the years of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, after the Mexican-American Civil War in 1848. History has shown that early segregation of Mexicans began during the Manifest Destiny ideology. U.S. settlers felt an obligation to expand further west, stealing Mexican and Indian lands along the way. Furthermore, the ideology of superiority became more common as U.S. legislation began targeting any non-Anglo ethnicity during the Great Depression. Anti-foreigner rhetoric expanded after World War II when more