Letters: Changing attitudes about immigration

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RichardB Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 9:55 p.m.

    "The toleration of illegal immigration undermines all of our labor; it rips at the social fabric. It's a race to the bottom. The one who plays by the rules is penalized... a guest worker program guarantees wages will never go up, and there is no way American citizens can compete with guest workers." --Vernon Briggs, Cornell University labor economics professor

    Vida: give our jobs to Mexicans? You go first, we are right behind you.

  • VIDAR Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:44 p.m.

    2 bits

    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    There's no "Anti-Immigration Movement".
    There's an "Anti-Illegal-Immigration Movement".
    There's a BIG difference.

    so make all those in the country citizens who want to be. Particularly the kids/young adults brought her by their parents.
    I do not think those who are against the "illegal immigrants" are really for immigration. that is just what they say, what they really want is protectionism for their jobs, and handouts.
    I say if someone from mexico can come here, and do your job better then you, then shame on you for not taking advanatage of all the things this country has offered you. Americans should not be competing with someone from mexico for the same job. Americans should be giving jobs to people from mexico. The only group that has a right to complain is maybe teenagers.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 9, 2013 4:25 p.m.

    2bits - At the risk of focusing too much on semantics, it is not my opinion that the letter writer fails to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants, that is a fact. Unless, of course, you are clairvoyant and have the ability to explain which parts of the following excerpt were referring to legal and illegal immigrants: "[i]mmigrants can find living in the U.S. a lot better than from where many of them come. However, I can't help but think that they immediately assume this country will provide everything at all times." Indeed, those blanket, general statements are the only ones made about immigrants other than the claims specifically referencing her own grandparents. Sorry, you're wrong - no matter how many times you hit the caps lock.

    Further, when your purported "anti-illegal-immigration movement" unduly imposes restrictions and incumbrances upon immigrant access to the US, you become the "anti-immigration movement." Don't believe me? Great, keep ignoring the realities of the situation, it only helps the progressives win elections.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:14 p.m.

    1880 to 1920 we allowed 500,000 annually. Now we give over a million a year access, yet people complain our laws are to tough? They are more lenient now than in the great wave.

    We also give out 3.2 million work visas, with 20 million working part time, unable to find full time work.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 9, 2013 12:14 p.m.

    Stalwart Sentinel,
    Is it possible that YOUR opinion is also based on YOUR interpretation of what she was trying to say? At least I'm able to admit that my opinion is based on my interpretation. Seems like you think YOUR opinion is "Fact".

    She may have lumped them. She didn't really say.

    I presume that since she pointed out that her ancestors "followed the rules" when they immigrated to the US in the early 1900s... that she recognized there is a difference when you follow the rules and when you don't. Maybe she was saying that ALL immigrants are the same. But I think that's YOUR interpretation.

    There's no "Anti-Immigration Movement".
    There's an "Anti-Illegal-Immigration Movement".
    There's a BIG difference.

  • VIDAR Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 10:59 a.m.

    The other point I want to make is, that there has always been groups in the United States, opposed to any immigration.
    These are not new arguments. They were used against the Chinese, Italians, Scotts, Irish, ect. and even those from Finland.
    They are taking all our jobs these groups said. They are dirty and non-desirable they said. They live off the public dole.
    Stop immigration was their motto.
    Where would we be as a country? if we had given into the anti-immigration movements in the 1800’s and 1900”s

  • VIDAR Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 10:53 a.m.

    They followed the entrance regulations, were sponsored by relatives or friends and settled in those areas.
    They quickly found jobs to get themselves on their own feet financially, which was not an easy task. However, they persevered and lived in the United States the rest of their lives.
    The only difference I see between Marilyn’s grandparents, and current immigrants, is followed entrance regulations.
    If Marilyn’s grandparents had to follow current immigration policies, she may not live in this country, but Finland.
    When my grandmother came over on a boat from Europe, it was hi, hello, and howdy.
    Now immigration is a bureaucratic mess.
    Why does it take years to become a citizen?
    I have no problem with someone who wants to work hard, and take care of their family.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 9, 2013 8:42 a.m.

    2bits -

    1 - I was actually trying to be generous to you by acknowledging your interpretation of things but given your response, perhaps you should consider the fact that the letter notes that her ancestors followed the rules and then she proceeds to lump all current immigrants into one group. She does not distinguish between illegal and legal, hence my statement above about "current immigrants." She distinguishes for her own family but then does not do so for others, this bolsters my point from above - you actually fall pray to the same inability to distinguish when you denote the "wave" of illegals. In other words, your interpretation is incorrect.

    2 - I see no evidence my response was angered, please point out where I showed any level of frustration. On the contrary, one would suggest that your use of all caps when trying to make a point demonstrates frustrated emotion and desperation.

    3 - I, like all liberals, differentiate between legal and illegal. However, we recognize that the current laws in place are unjust and incorrect which is why we are pushing to change them. And guess what? We're going to win that fight eventually.

  • AmericaV Huntsville, AL
    July 9, 2013 8:32 a.m.

    I will 100% guarantee that his Finnish grandparents never received welfare payments for having children once they arrived here.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 2:58 a.m.

    Why have laws when they are not enforced? There is a huge difference between legal and illegal. Multiple felonies come to mind.

    Mexico has the 13th best economy in the world and food programs. Allowing extended families cause the long lines. Go back to just immediate families and the lines will be cut in half.

    Legal immigration numbers should never be set by those coming here illegally. They should be set to what's best for the country.

    Democrats use to care about our countries poor. In 1969, Chavez aled a march to the Mexican border to protest illegal immigration, accompanied by Sen. Walter Mondale and Ralph Abernathy, who was Martin Luther King's successor as head of the Southern Leadership Conference. It's a sad world when no one speaks for the citizens of the country.

    Business would be forced to employ people full time, if it wasn't for all the cheap illegal labor. Now many of us will feel the 29 hour, no insurance wave that is coming with Obama care. A vote for amnesty is a vote against poor and middle class Americans.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    July 8, 2013 4:42 p.m.

    Illegal migrants are not immigrants. There is a difference and until we and the media stop trying to make them the same there will be confusion when discussing immigration. Once again,...immigrants stand in line, pay the fees, wait their turn, assimilate into the country, and become citizens. Illegal migrants do not.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 8, 2013 4:33 p.m.


    "I try not to get into commenting on people's comments, or adjusting my thoughts/comments in response to what's already been said (but I always fail)."

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 8, 2013 4:23 p.m.

    So when you make an assumption its simply an "interpretation" but when LDS liberal does the same thing its "reading more into it than was intended"?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 8, 2013 1:15 p.m.

    Stalwart Sentinel,

    Of course it's MY interpretation? That's all I can write is MY interpretation.

    Did you READ the article? When talking about her relatives who immigrated way back when, She stated, "Both sets came from Finland in the early 1900s. They followed the entrance regulations".

    So yes I think she was contrasting those relatives who came way back when (legally) and the wave of ILLEGAL immigration we have going on today.

    And some people on the left DO get up tight when you differentiate between legal and ILLEGAL immigration. I can give examples if you need them. But your angered response was a good one. No offense should have been taken IF you differentiate between "legal" and "ILLEGAL" immigration and not push for law to make ILLEGAL immigration into LEGAL immigration.

    LDS Liberal,
    Who said anything about "lazy illegals"?
    I think that was you reading more into it than was intended.
    She said her relatives who settled here legally had to work hard. I don't think that means she's calling ILLEGAL immigrant's "Lazy Immigrants". Let's not put words not said into people's mouths.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 8, 2013 12:35 p.m.

    My #1 pet peeve with conservatives over immigration policy is their whining about the 14th Amendment [i.e., trampling THE Constitution].

    Like it or NOT,
    babies born in the United States ARE U.S. citizens, period.

    And, as for the implied "lazy illegals"...
    I want this letter writer to pay full price for everything she's getting on the cheap.
    messy, ugly, dirty, labor jobs - no one else wants, and no one else is willing to PAY for!

    Companies and Businessmen are the source and reason for illegal immigration.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 8, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    2bits - That may be your interpretation but I find nothing to suggest the letter writer is making that distinction among current immigrants. In fact, I find the letter writer has taken a stance of lumping every immigrant into a single category, evidenced by the statement "[i]mmigrants can find living in the U.S. a lot better than from where many of them come. However, I can't help but think that they immediately assume this country will provide everything at all times." If the latter isn't a blanket statement about an entire class of people, I don't know what is.

    Further, liberals don't have a problem with the concept you lay out. We simply have a problem with the parameters that are currently in place to distinguish between illegal and legal. Indeed, the difference truly boils down to the fact that we, as liberals, don't see the American Dream as a zero sum game and proactively work to afford as many people as possible with the opportunity to succeed. The better off my neighbors are, the better off I am within a successful society. Unfortunately, the opposite is true of conservatives.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 8, 2013 10:17 a.m.

    Stalwart Sentinel,
    I think what she was trying to say is... We have no problem with "Immigration", but "ILLEGAL" Immigration... is a different story.

    Why does that concept cause the Left to bristle so much?

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    July 8, 2013 8:57 a.m.

    So, immigrants "immediately assume this country will provide everything at all times" ??

    Who are the immigrants who make that assumption? People who came from Finland at least had enough money to pay ship passage, had friendlier immigration laws and had people waiting here to sponsor them. People coming from Mexico, with none of these advantages, simply cross the border to find low-paying jobs to support their families. If they waited until they could come legally, their families would starve.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 8, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    So, this story is getting old, DesNews. We've heard the "my family of immigrants were hard working, amazing people while all the current group of immigrants are lazy, good-for-nothings" proclamations far too often. This argument is tired, worn-out, and demonstrably untrue.

    I'd like to challenge Ms. Pike to "change her attitude about immigration" by visiting local restaurants, construction companies, yard service companies, maid services, farms, ranches, or pretty much anything else that has to do with manual labor. She'll find extremely hard-working immigrants make up a majority of the most difficult, physically demanding jobs in our society and that attitudes like hers have perpetrated a cast system wherein a large part of the current slate of immigrants put in long hours in manually taxing jobs for low pay and they have little to no chance of advancement in their respective profession.

    If conservatives want to see a more productive society with immigrants they can start by treating everyone as equal human beings.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    July 8, 2013 1:17 a.m.

    I liked this letter. Many people forget that those who came here before 1965 legally, had to make it without a safety net. There was no welfare, no cookies at the border. Almost one third returned home, unable to make the change.

    We have let the special interest groups ruin our immigration laws.