Thursday, March 26, 2015

Illegal Immigrants Surpassing American Citizens



There’s no question that illegal immigration is constantly tossed around like a pingpong ball. Making the debate on whether or not immigrants should be granted amnesty, neverending. The U.S was founded by people who are now referred to as, “immigrants” these immigrants being the “undocumented,” “the aliens,” the “illegal people.” When the only real immigrants here are the “Americans” themselves, the citizens of the U.S. However, American citizens still argue that this is their land, a land constantly referred to as “the land of the free,” is not so free after all when it comes to the undocumented people that come from all over the world looking for a better life. But most of all, American citizens fear being surpassed by a different race.

Some Americans argue that spending money on granting amnesty to immigrants is just not worth the cost. Ed Butowsky, a highly international recognized wealth manager and financial advisor states, “we simply can’t afford it. Amnesty will cost you, the American taxpayer a fortune” (1). This is why so many American citizens are opposed to it, it’s not all about the undocumented immigrants, but the money. Americans don’t want their money to go towards something that does not benefit them. However, Americans fail to keep in mind that immigrants are also contributing towards that sum of money that they (American citizens) fail to spend. Taxpayers are not just all legal citizens but illegal immigrants as well. Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times writer says, “they (immigrants) have contributed $100 billion to Social Security over a decade without any intention of collecting benefits...houses headed by unauthorized immigrants paid another $11 billion in taxes in 2010 alone.” This goes to show that immigrants are paying for something that does not benefit them all while some Americans refuse to do the same for them.

Most Americans also fear that immigrants will begin to change the world in which they live in. They’re afraid of assimilation but yet they want immigrants to assimilate to their American ways. This is hypocrisy at its best. Theodore Roosevelt once said in 1918, “every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country” (1). This goes to show that the fear of assimilation by illegal immigrants, in the U.S, by American citizens, has been thriving and keeping American citizens at the edge of their seats since 1918 and maybe even far longer than that. Nicholas Kristof then continues by saying, “many Americans see foreigners moving into their towns, see signs in Spanish, and fret about changes to the traditional fabric of society” (1). It seems like the only thing Americans are afraid of here, is change. They’re afraid that they’ll become less superior because as of now, and as of always, whites in general have been seen as the “superior” race. Americans see America the way that their white ancestors left it, but fail to see that before their white ancestors, Natives inhabited this land.


All in all, immigration will never be fully resolved because underneath it all lies racism and inequality. Granting amnesty would be one step forward and then another two steps back. Amnesty has been given to the undocumented before but what about the undocumented people now? History is repeating itself because some of the American citizens alive now, hold the same beliefs their ancestors had who were strongly opposed to legalizing immigration. People make change, and change also makes people. The day that we all start thinking as one and for one and not just for ourselves, is the day that we will advance to a better world, together.  


12 comments:

  1. When quoting someone try not to use brackets in the writers quotes. Explain to the reader in the next sentence who the writer is talking about. You were also using a bit too many quotes. It's great that you are using evidence, but maybe one quote per paragraph is enough. Try to also focus on other consequences such as separating families and much more. Plus, it was a little difficult figuring out what side you were on. It felt as is you were in the middle of the argument on immigrants.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is pretty difficult to understand if you are pro and con because you did not mention if immigration should be amnestied or not. One can only assume that you are pro because of the negative evidence and comments about people who disagree with amnestying immigration. If you are pro, then it would have been nice if you mention some positive evidence on how immigrants will make the United States better or more of a positive change. Also, though racism does play in on why immigrants should not be amnestied, you should have acknowledge more that it is mostly about money. If you were to tell a racist politician that by amnestying immigrants it will guarantee a great amount of profit, it can be difficult to visualize him turning it down. However, you are right if we as a nation stop thinking about ourselves and more about others then we will one day all advance to a brighter future.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your essay's tone was riveting. There was flow and nothing felt out of place. Your essay had great ideas and it didn't feel like a summary of the articles. However, it was difficult understanding what position you were for. A reader shouldn't have to dig in your essay to know what position you are for. If you added a very direct sentence in your introduction on your position than the reader knows your position immediately.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This piece speaks of the ignorance and hypocrisy of America's society today. America was founded by immigrants, but people refuse to think about that when debating why immigrants should not be allowed into this nation. As this paper implies, there is something deeper involved when arguing against having immigrants in America, it is racism and hatred. Of course that will never be stated though, which is why the issue of money is always brought up. It is as if the issue of money is just brought up to cover what people truly feel.

      Delete
  5. It's pretty to understand which side you were on. However, your essay speaks about the racism immigrants endure by our nation. It's usually the hispanics that gets the most hatred. You explain many disadvantages to having immigrants such as financial reasons. Your argument speaks on if we stop thinking about ourselves and start thinking about others than we can grow as a nation. I do agree there is some ignorance in today' society. You speak very cleary on that. However, you should be more clear in the first paragraph in which side you are on.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It was difficult to see what side it was that you were on. Regardless of what side you chose, you have stated very interesting points. American citizens that are against amnesty do seem to be afraid of change. History is repreating itself like stated above. One day, hopefully we can all become one together.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Your solution to the undocumented community is somewhat confusing. Your paragraphs suggest that you are for-amnesty but you say it will never occur because of the racism that exist in our country. Your last sentence suggest that in the future we will be able to overcome this obstacle but you don't really go into debt. Other than that, your supporting paragraphs are well written to support a pro-amnesty solution.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You had very supporting paragraphs with supporting evidence that you provided. You explained the pros and cons well but only one thing was confusing was the side you were lining against. you seem to be was for amnesty but it was to clarifying.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's understandable that people fear change. It is true, change to some can be a frightful experience.Of course people don't want to give away their money, humans are selfish, there are very few people who will do anything out of the goodness of their heart without expecting something in return. Try to stay to one position, when you said "it will never occur", you are doubting your own position and that will be an opening for counters.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This argument was strong and provided enough evidence in your points. A problem with this argument is that you're very one sided. You're arguing one side, Which is pro amnesty, instead of looking at why being against amnesty can have its benefits as well. Showing your understanding of both sides of the situation will strengthen your argument by showing you understand both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Great way to counterargue Butowsky's argument. Illegal immigration has occurred for many many years now and opponents have not found a reasonable solution yet because they fail to accept that a path to legalization is what is needed. The "white majority" persists in kicking out illegal immigrants because they are "invading" their country and, like the blog states, they too at one point came from different parts of teh world. If they were granted amnesty and were provided with a land to grow roots in, why can't they do the same fro molder illegal i immigrants.

    ReplyDelete