Re forming immigration law

Try it. We'll put you out.

I'm tired of hearing it. 

Exhausted, actually,you wear me out. The axiom is our immigrations laws are in shambles and must be fixed. That is the starting point of any discussion, and Little Sister, that does have a familiar frenetic activist ring. 

I reject that starting point and pick up elsewhere to speak my own language. My separate concurrent discussion flatly rejects the language provided and skips over whatever terms are prompted by whatever panel I find myself, it begins; our immigration laws are well-thought out through long dragged out deliberative process, the laws are solid, humanitarian, flexible, and meet our nation's needs, past, present, and into the future, irrespective of continuous activist efforts to subvert them. 

It continues, indeed, our immigration laws serve as a model for open societies across the globe, and anybody arguing otherwise has a political aim in mind and is using emotion, again, to distort the actual real picture, again, and weaken our country's defenses and internal makeup, again, with unfortunate side effect of disrupting labor. Again. Immigration reformers seek cheap labor, a diluted franchise at the ballot box and they utterly fail at defending wide open porous borders, activist proponents for reform fail to defend wide open unrestricted libertarian free flow of labor. No country that I know of does this, not that it is a requirement, reform proponents fail to defend why the United States should be first among nations with free flow of labor across borders. 

I  pulled this bizarre insistence out of my ass because the smell of your own sudden insistence makes it obvious where you pulled yours. 

The second axiom is Republican donors are for immigration reform because they like cheap labor too but their base does not for sensible reasons all nations give for their own immigration policies. All of them do. Just try emigrating to Canada. 

<alert>

A friend I knew did. He's a mess. OMG. A friendly mess. On all kind of public support, was stricken with BDS on top of all his actual handicaps including cognitive processing, "Damnit, I'm leaving." And he meant it. Actually did attempt to emigrate to Canada, but Canada has better sense than to take on another ward of the state. 

"What? No wait, what? I"m happy to see you but you convinced me you moved." 

"They didn't accept my application." 

</alert>

See?  And he is a regular  person. You'd expect him to be able to go back and forth at will, to be whatever he wants, Canadian, American, be all you can be, but no, he was rejected by Canada for citizenship, and sensibly so, I think for medical reasons. 

So who are these Republican donors who insist on cheap labor to the extent they will have borders wide open to inflow so great it affects the whole social structure. Who are they? Open Secrets Republican corporate donors for 2012 election cycle.

Bank

Finance

Senate Conservative Fund

Club for Growth

Blue Cross

Beer

G.E.

Auto dealers

Verison

Exxon

Kkoch

Some insurance

a lot more, it's all ordinary

Honestly, I don't see anything unusual, nothing out of line. Unless these break down into distinct immigration-related industries, like agriculture and home building I am just not seeing it. 

And incidentally, the next "Koch bros." shibboleth you hear, probably within the next minute, point to this Open Secrets page. It shows a particular type of madness, an obsession so fantastic it clouds out everything else on the list of donors that would otherwise completely overwhelm that obsession. 

Here's the thing I'm hearing that is so irritating coming from Tech companies and especially from newly minted billionaires, an idea, an attitude that formed  early when I was already out of the labor force. My first laptop that I bought with my own cash, I had already bought hundreds as purchaser for FRB, but now my very own. I called tech support and got it. A person in a distant land. The employment situation was not all that great in the U.S. at the time and then I cast back and recalled the angst I felt first entering the work force, back then, looking for suitable employment, trying to get my education to work for me after working so hard to get it. That this new tech company was not training young Americans I found deeply offensive at the time, and still do. Why were the American kids left to their own resources to come up with the education they hope industry will desire when the industries themselves have resources to train for their specific requirements?  Why is tech industry demanding pre-educated employees? Why do they claim they require tech graduates now from outside the country instead of training American students themselves today? The tech companies could do a lot to ease American strain on education, strain on employment, they could have a huge impact on that but instead they lobby to add to social problem both ways. 

I say, screw that. Train American students. Provide the educations yourself for your industrial tech needs, and cease lobbying for cheap labor. I say write laws that wrap tech companies up into the education process as solid repayment for their lobbying efforts.