Does television news give you an accurate view of real news? Sorry, I channel surf, bouncing from TV show to news to sports to movies. Sometimes within minutes. Guess what I landed on? Immigration.
Rather, the immigration problem. Protesters in Washington and elsewhere were protesting, for lack of anything constructive, any immigration policy which did not give full amnesty to illegal immigrants.
Who was doing the protesting? Illegal immigrants.
Perhaps I don’t recognize all the social ramifications of immigration, or even illegal immigration.
At a simple level, life in the US is sufficiently attractive that many people from other countries, mostly poor countries, want to live here.
In fact, many are willing to die to get here, while others are willing to sneak in and break laws to live here.
Once they’re here, most illegal (and legal) immigrants find work of some kind or another and try to live their lives as the rest of us. In debt.
Through the decades of porous border policy, the US has plenty of illegal immigrants. So many, in fact, that they’re willing to make some public noise about their rights to stay in the US.
My mom gave me a clipping from the newspaper which seems, on the surface, to explain the situation better than anything I’ve heard on CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox, or wherever.
The clipping said, in part:
“Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into the country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.
Do I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests?
Let’s say I break into your house. Let’s say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I’ve done all the things you don’t like to do. I’m hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).
According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family’s insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part). If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there.
It’s only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m just trying to better myself. I’m hard-working and honest, um, except for, well, you know.
And what a deal it is for me! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudiced, and being an anti-housebreaker. Oh yeah, and I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.”
That’s an attractive analogy, right? What’s wrong with this picture? Am I missing something?
Editor’s Note: Before her death, Tera passed along her personal journal. It is filled with hundreds of comments, essays, observations, and perspectives on every subject matter. As time permits, I will edit and publish select journal entries for Tera Talks—Alexis Kayhill
Interesting comment but flawed analogy.
Nations are not the same as home owners. If a home owner pays someone to work in their house, they sanction the person’s presence. Illegal immigrants are being paid to live and work here. Their labor and payment for it does give them a link to rights in the US. To live and work in the US means to participate in taxation as part of the process. If I am not mistaken, taxation without the right of representation was one of the reasons the colonies broke with Britian in the first place.
As is often the case, over-simplified analogies seldom deal with the depth and complexity of real life issues. Sorry Tera but this one falls way short.
Liam, there’s a few flaws in your response.
Actually, I think Tera was spot on with this view, which was more of a question than a statement. Besides, it wasn’t her analogy anyway; only a reprint from a newspaper, right?
While illegal immigrants are being paid for work, they are not being paid to live in the US. They do so illegally.
I do agree that even payment and work does not automatically give them a link to all the rights of a US citizen, however, assuming they pay taxes as part of their payment, they have some rights.
That’s legalized taxation without full representation.
It’s a complex issue, to be sure. The analogy Tera quoted was simplistic, but it displays the degree of frustration that many in the US feel.
Tera merely asked the question, ‘What’s wrong with this picture?’
I think we’re supposed to think about it and provide a response.
I’m not finding holes in Tera’s analogy, but I too, found them in the first response.
“If a home owner pays someone to work in their house, they sanction the person’s presence.” I think the writer confused the “home owner = country/government” in Tera’s analogy, with the avg home owner. A person is Anytown, USA who hires an illegal alien to work in their home is not empowered to sanction that person’s presence in this country.
“To live and work in the US means to participate in taxation as part of the process.” Uh…no it doesn’t. Many here illegally are paid wages in cash (employer saves SS, and other employer taxes.) Others who are paid and “taxed” are doing so via identity theft—using fake SSN.
“If I am not mistaken, taxation without the right of representation was one of the reasons the colonies broke with Britian in the first place.” True, it’s one reason, and even though it didn’t make the Bill of Rights is cherished as part of our foundation. However, the logical conclusion of your reasoning is that legal citizens/subjects of another country should be able to come here, pay some tax and then tell the rest of us how it is going to be. I can’t go for that. Do some research and learn for yourself how “open” Mexico or even Europe are in this regard. I don’t believe any other country hands out citizenship to anybody who is born within their borders either.
I recognize the “newspaper clipping” as being from Neal Boortz, a nationally-syndicated Libertarian talk radio host in my home town of Atlanta. He posted this analogy on his website.
I agree with LunaMac on this. If you’re going to argue the complexity of the issue, you need then to look at all of the hooks that the illegals take advantage of to claim a right to stay here. The “citizenship by birth” thing needs to end for all but those whose parents (at least one parent) is already a U.S. citizen. Then we wouldn’t have the kind of case we’re seeing over that Chicago church giving sanctuary to that illegal immigrant woman claiming that she should stay because her child is a legal citizen. Of course, she could take her child with her back to Mexico and then work to return legally – but that just doesn’t make sense to some people.
Let’s say 300 years ago, in a boat called the Mayflower, a bunch of Europeans broke into your house without permission (with the excuse that they are just trying to better themselves. They are hard-working and honest). When you find out and ask them to leave, they just turn around and kill your family, steal your belongings, drive you into a small bathroom in the downstairs attic (and call it a ‘reservation’). But they were just there trying to better themselves, and are hard-working and honest, except for that whole murder/ rape/ theft of land thing. Force you, at gunpoint, to learn their language, wear their clothes, believe in their beliefs, tear your entire life apart build entire cities in your pastures and your land…but remember they are just trying to better themselves, are hard-working and honest…except for that one thing…
Thanks, but the taxation argument fails when people with neither a TIN nor an SSN are the subject. You see, without one of those two identifiers, one cannot pay taxes. Indeed, an employer cannot pay the taxes for the worker. Taxation without representation presupposes, by its very wording, taxation.