Immigration - Thank-You Cardinal O'Malley

  • Thread starter Thread starter godisgood77
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, I’m afraid it is still not the same since we didn’t have immigration restrictions back then. So you could just walk across. But we don’t have that now and if people are wanting to become citizens, they shouldn’t go breaking the law.
 
Why are American bishops always so left wing? It’s a joke.
Clearly this man is oblivious to the fact that it is the poor and marginalized who will suffer most from large scale immigration.
 
I’m sure the stagnation of wages on the lower end during the same time period of massive legal and illegal immigration has no relation :roll_eyes:

Must be all the evil executives and CEO’s fault
 
It’s basic economics. If you increase the supply of labour, the wage rate goes down. Simple supply and demand.
 
Not entirely true, Chinese immigrants were pretty prevalent on the west coast long before the 1960s.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
I’m sure the stagnation of wages on the lower end during the same time period of massive legal and illegal immigration has no relation :roll_eyes:
Click to expand...
That’s the problem with informal studies. They take data on too few instances and extrapolate to general principles. Just because two things happened during the same time period does not mean they are causally related. That’s where fear mongering can play on our inability to think scientifically.
 
Hmm. I invite you to read some history of Ellis Island, and the way that immigrants were checked out. It wasn’t just a free pass to the US during the Irish, Italian, other European immigrant waves from 1892-1954. It was literally called an “Immigrant Inspection Station”. People with health problems, criminal background, unskilled workers were sent back home.
 
Last edited:
Peebo said:
That’s the problem here in the US…people are always putting their own political bias on statements the church makes…
Click to expand...
I see the comment you made as the problem: you conflate the political opinions of individual bishops with “statements the church makes.” The fact is the church makes no statements at all regarding specific policies except those involving actions that are intrinsically evil.
…instead of seeing it as “Catholic” they see it as “political” because it doesn’t fit with their political beliefs
Click to expand...
This is an uncharitable judgment. That it is a reasonable conclusion based on the bishops’ comments reinforces my position. I call issues political because they in fact will require laws to be passed to address the perceived problem. Virtually nothing in church doctrine helps us determine what law will actually work in bringing about a desired outcome. By calling some proposals “Catholic”, which the bishops imply by offering their own solutions, it leads inevitably to believing that those who reject their proposals are less than Catholic. Do you really find this position appropriate?

You are right though: I do reject the bishops’ proposals when they don’t fit with my political beliefs. Where you are wrong is in thinking their positions represent church teaching. Their opinions, like my own, are based on our personal political beliefs because church doctrines tell us nothing whatever about how specific political problems are best resolved.

“The Church respects the legitimate autonomy of the democratic order and is not entitled to express preferences for this or that institutional or constitutional solution.” (Italics in the original - Centesimus annus)

We may debate whether this or that particular proposal exceeds the general guidelines the church has set out, but it is wrong to simply assume that a bishop’s political views are automatically true and all contrary views are automatically sinful.
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
Hmm. I invite you to read some history of Ellis Island, and the way that immigrants were checked out. It wasn’t just a free pass to the US during the Irish, Italian, other European immigrant waves from 1892-1954. It was literally called an “Immigrant Inspection Station”. People with health problems, criminal background, unskilled workers were sent back home.
Click to expand...
And, from what I understand, you had to have a sponsor; either a relative or the employer you were going to work for.

If the immigrant went on public assistance within a certain period the sponsor had to pay it back.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Formal studies have shown the same thing. The claim of depressing wages and causing unemployment is just fear mongering. The immigrants are also consumers and they create demand and grow the economy.
Click to expand...
“Formal studies” often say no more than what the authors want them to say. That you can find studies saying one thing is made less meaningful by the fact that other studies say the opposite.

The claim that neither wages nor employment are affected by immigration seems belied by what can be observed. Go into a Lowe’s or a Home Depot. You will see that virtually everything in the store is bilingual, and the reason for that is obvious. The building trades have been virtually taken over by Hispanic immigrants. Talk to anyone who has lawn care or remodeling done; what you will find is that most of the people in those lines of work either don’t speak English or don’t speak it well.

I recently had some tile work done in my house and was talking with the worker. He said that in the past he used to get $15 a square foot to lay marble, but that today he got only $5, which was better than in Miami where workers only got $1.50.
 
whyeyeman said:
Why are American bishops always so left wing? It’s a joke.
Clearly this man is oblivious to the fact that it is the poor and marginalized who will suffer most from large scale immigration.
Click to expand...
And I think that’s important, the effect of immigration on the working class.

You could make the argument that even if immigration helps the country as a whole, it doesn’t help the working class or unskilled person competing for jobs with immigrants.
 
I just had to share this photo.
Radicals awaiting deportation 1920 at Ellis Island
 
Ender said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Formal studies have shown the same thing. The claim of depressing wages and causing unemployment is just fear mongering. The immigrants are also consumers and they create demand and grow the economy.
Click to expand...
“Formal studies” often say no more than what the authors want them to say. That you can find studies saying one thing is made less meaningful by the fact that other studies say the opposite.

The claim that neither wages nor employment are affected by immigration seems belied by what can be observed. Go into a Lowe’s or a Home Depot. You will see that virtually everything in the store is bilingual, and the reason for that is obvious. The building trades have been virtually taken over by Hispanic immigrants. Talk to anyone who has lawn care or remodeling done; what you will find is that most of the people in those lines of work either don’t speak English or don’t speak it well.

I recently had some tile work done in my house and was talking with the worker. He said that in the past he used to get $15 a square foot to lay marble, but that today he got only $5, which was better than in Miami where workers only got $1.50.
Click to expand...
You counter formal studies, done scientifically, with more informal annecdotes. Annecdotes do not belie anything. If you know of a formal study that shows that immigration depresses the economy, please cite it.
 
Irish potato farmers were not getting food stamps for crying out loud. Unless you mean workhouses and such?
signit said:
And, from what I understand, you had to have a sponsor; either a relative or the employer you were going to work for.

If the immigrant went on public assistance within a certain period the sponsor had to pay it back.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
exactly. anecdotes do not equal data and correlation doesn’t equal causation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top