Biden’s Immigration Damage

Source: Wall Street Journal.

The editorial talks about nuances of immigration policy, but I’m sick of nuance. Surely we can all agree with the principle that a nation’s borders should be controlled to the point that no one immigrates without permission.

I’m willing to talk and debate about how permissive our immigration policy should be, but first I want to see that we can implement the policy we decide upon as a matter of will.

43 thoughts on “Biden’s Immigration Damage

  1. People should come here legally but our system is terribly unjust.

    First, for those wishing to come here legally and become citizens, there is a maximum number admitted each year, with no more than 7% coming from any one country. There is no adjustment for demand. That means that we will admit the same number from Mexico as from Iceland. As a result, the waiting time for a Brit wishing to emigrate will be slightly over a year while the average waiting time for a Mexican with first degree relatives who are citizens and a job waiting runs about 130 years. Clearly, we need to be more welcoming to those coming from countries with cross border families and that means a lot more from Mexico should be welcomed.

    Second, not everyone wants to come here and stay. We need a realistic, demand driven, guest worker program. Currently our guest worker Visas limited by US labor union’s.demands to keep out competitors.

    If our immigration laws were just, there would be less illegal immigration.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “If our immigration laws were just, there would be less illegal immigration.”

      I hate to say this, but I think you nailed it. However, there is not enough political will on either side to find the “just” and make it happen.


  2. Dr. Tabor, what is sad is you are spot on but one could not find enough congress people that agree with you to fill a phone booth.


  3. I don’t think a more “just” system would have a dramatic effect on illegals when we have so many entitlements in place supporting people that ARE illegal. Free school, medical, welfare programs, etc are not meant to be doled out to those who are illegal but 63% of non-citizens access welfare anyway including illegals.
    We have borders for a reason, to control our population in relation to resources. The best way to help people is to help them in their own country not open the free stuff spigot here like Democrats are hell bent on. If we do not control our border we are soon doomed to emulate the same conditions that these people are currently leaving, drug gangs and mass poverty


    1. We have a labor shortage right now, but not a people shortage.

      Ideally, we could trade some people already here who think life is just voting and waiting for a check for some more hard working Mexicans who would contribute much more to the country, but failing that, we have plenty of room and resources for people who want to work.


      1. “Ideally, we could trade some people already here who think life is just voting and waiting for a check…”

        It must be terrible being you! When you come right down to it, a lot of hate is self-hate.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. It must be terrible to be happy with such injustice.

          There are millions of people eager to work and contribute to our economy, but who live in other countries where they have little opportunity to do so.

          So, I have no patience for those who have the great fortune to live here but are content to live as parasites.

          I’ll save my compassion for those who would be contributing actors in the economy but live on the wrong side of a border.

          Milton Freidman warned that we could have a welfare system or open borders, but not both. He was right, we can’t accommodate millions more parasites, but more workers we could welcome.

          The only reason we need to control our borders with force is because we have a welfare system that allows parasites to thrive. Were it not for that welfare system, the marketplace would control our borders passively.

          Those few who really can’t work can be cared for by charity,


          1. I will stand by my observation. A very large portion of what you post is dripping with hatred. And you have reinforced the point with this odious response.

            “Parasites?” Really. What part of the phrase “working poor” is too hard for you to understand? Still hung up on “Welfare Queens” and “Bucks” buying steaks with food stamps? That is so last century.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. When I worked in a dental practice in Newport News, SSI disability was the largest single “employer” in the practice base. Nearly all of those ‘disabled’ were capable of work of some kind. SSI disability has become the new dole.

            Many were ‘disabled’ for behavioral reasons. But aggressive, contingency fee, attorneys, make it easier to give them benefits than stop them from making claims.

            I spent years caring for middle income and working poor patients and I know the realities far more intimately than you do.. The parasites ruin things for those who really want to work.


          3. How many of your “parasites” are coming across the border and how many of them are looking for a WORKING better life?

            You don’t know the stories of any of them, so to classify them all the way you have is similar to some other idiot who rode a gold (plated) escalator in 2015 and declared them all rapists and drug dealers. And he never did get Mexico to pay for shit.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. Read more carefully.

            The parasites are already here.

            We need immigration laws to prevent the parasites of the world from coming, but the great majority who come here now are coming to work and I would like to see them welcomed.


          5. We could gather the parasites up and get rid of them like midges that you spit out of your mouth.

            Paraphrase of V. Putin in his call for a purer Russia.

            A German dictator of the last century called undesirables rats and vowed to exterminate them.

            Yes, we do have some that game the system. Our last president was a prime example. Not paying taxes, screwing banks, abusing the judiciary and stiffing hard working suppliers.

            We have not changed immigration laws because Congress won’t do their job. We love illegals. They are compliant, hard working, accept low wages and brutal conditions with little recourse. If we really wanted to stop the illegals we would jail the employers. Soon the illegal job market would shrivel. But we love what we have going now. Plus it gives Republicans a campaign issue that they can blame Democrats. Yet, it is the Tysons of the nation that keep the scam going.

            Liked by 2 people

          6. The current immigration laws date from 1967, when a blatantly racist system was replaced with a subtly racist one.

            But it still strongly discriminates against Hispanics and Mexicans in particular.

            I’ve been told by some contractors that they employ Mexican workers not because they work cheaper but because they are better workers.

            But SSI disability has become the new welfare in the US, as Obama greatly expanded the qualifying disabilities to include mental disorders that cannot be disproven in a coached applicant.

            There are law firms you can hear advertising here in Tidewater every day that specialize in getting dubious SSI claims approved and doctors in their employ.

            I agree that our immigration laws need to be fixed, but the GOP has its set of issues, and Democrats beholden to unions have theirs as well.

            Legal immigrants can call the police when they are mistreated, illegals cannot, and that is wrong.


          7. Disability SSI covers about 10 million. Over 65, children and working age. Most are disabled and/or blind.

            So out of 330 million, perhaps a few million are cheating.

            True, a million is a lot, but any organization, public and private, is not going to be perfect. So if the million or so amounts to 1% or less, that is not great, but no catastrophe either. We probably have many times more tax cheats. Or if not outright cheats, tax favoritism through laws that give specific breaks to just specific companies.

            I would call a tax cheater a real parasite. Not only does he have the great benefit of working here, he scoffs at paying his agreed upon share. “Only little people pay taxes”. The Queen of Mean.

            Working poor…not so much. SSI keeps a roof over their heads that is not attached to an old station wagon.

            Liked by 2 people

          8. “The parasites are already here.”

            You mean the hard working people being paid under the table by the industries that bring them in so as not having to pay American workers minimum wage (or better)? Or the farm hands working the fields of the Eastern Shore?

            You castigate a large portion of people who are working hard and providing for their families with ALL of the immigrants coming to this country.


          9. No. again you misread.

            The parasites are BORN here, and squander the blessing of being born in the US, while hard working people from other countries would risk death for the opportunities they have but won’t pursue.


          10. “The parasites are BORN here,”…

            The true PARASITES in this country are the corporations that take advantage of tax laws and hire cheap labor and exploit them for all they are worth and then deny they are doing anything wrong.

            Your bigotry is shining through. Or at a minimum, your stereotyping. Either way, it is kind of sickening.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. The corporations who make us globally competitive and provide us with our standard of living are the parasites, but the beggars who could support themselves but choose not to are not?


          12. You keep trying to mix-and-match things. Corporations that exploit workers are parasites. Corporations who do everything legally ( or illegally and unethically) to avoid paying taxes are parasites.

            Are there some who take advantage programs? Yes. No doubt. But you keep trying to lump them into one basket and paint them with the same broad brush brush.

            Liked by 1 person

          13. So, your refined definition of “parasites” seems to be people who receive SSDI but who “were capable of work of some kind.” And the only reason that they can get SSDI is because there are “corrupt” lawyers, doctors and judges willing to help them cheat for a fee. And how do you “know” this? Because you once upon a time provided dental service to people who seemed fine to you.

            Here in the real world the vast majority of people receiving the help that SSDI offers have provided evidence of real disabilities. In March this year there were about 7.8 million people receiving this help. It averaged $1,360 per recipient. If these “parasites” were to hobble off to minimum wage job they could have earned about $1,100 after taxes. If anyone would hire the blind, the lame, the sick, the retarded, the obese, etc, etc, etc.

            Liked by 1 person

          14. The SSDI payment may average $1360, but getting it qualifies the recipient for many other subsidies and benefits that together are much more than the average of the working poor’s income. Much less the income of a migrant laborer who travels a thousand miles from his family to send money home to them.

            So, send me more hard working immigrants and don’t expect me to cry over someone on SSDI for an eating disorder or PTSD because he was picked on in high school.

            SSDI should be for seriously disabled people, not loafers recruited and coached by a shyster.


          15. “The SSDI payment may average $1360, but getting it qualifies the recipient for many other subsidies and benefits that together are much more than the average of the working poor’s income”

            Horse Hockey! My mother was approved for SSDI @ age 58 when the cancer made it impossible for her to work. Her payments were just over $1000/month. The only other “benefits” she saw were related to being on Medicare.

            And she was denied twice before being …”recruited and coached by a shyster.””. Actually, she had to hire an attorney in order to be approved because the system only responds when a lawyer gets involved. SO it isn’t the lawyers recruiting clients; it is necessary for those who are applying for benefits under SSDI.

            You use your “stories” to justify your point. This is the reality for those who didn’t have the background you did. Mom busted her ass to provide for my brother and I after my parents divorced. Some of her failures were her own (Dance studio in a town where the “old guard” held sway” ) and others were out of necessity; low paying retail jobs, just to make ends meet.

            Liked by 1 person

          16. The difficulties your Mother faced are the result of the massive fraud against the system. Legitimate claims get buried in with the parasites.


          17. Using a word applied to unscrupulous attorneys for 1000 years is anti Semitic?

            Lots of words we use have origins in Hebrew or Yiddish, and are universally understood.

            If I use the word Thursday, does that make me anti Norwegian?


          18. …” unscrupulous attorneys for 1000 years is anti Semitic?”

            Actually, yes it is. If you look into the background of the word, you will find it is based in that category. Just because it has been used for 1000 years does not change the fact.

            Liked by 1 person

          19. My understanding is that the word shyster come from an 18th century German adaptation of scheissen or shit. A crook who misrepresents himself or his products. (Or a recent president 😇)

            Are we perhaps confusing a Shylock with shyster. Shylock is definitely an anti-Semitic slur of an unscrupulous money lender from a Shakespeare character by the same name.

            I may be wrong ( what else is new?) but I’ll toss out this tidbit and see if it floats ( like scheissen😂)

            Liked by 1 person

          20. You may be right and I may be confusing the two. However, if you look closely enough, the similarities are definitely there.

            According to, the word “shyster” was first used in 1844. Post-Shakespeare to be sure. But you can see how the two are VERY closely related. And I would not be surprised if Shylock led to shyster.


          21. “What does that have to do with the point?”

            I would think that would be obvious. But I will state it anyway.

            The point is that your silly and unresponsive response to Len’s thoughtful comments was based on a falsehood – being among the working poor and being a recipient of supplemental income from SSI are NOT mutually exclusive.

            You are exhibiting one of the hallmarks of the “conservative” mind. You are thinking in stereotypes – in this case about who gets SSDI and SSI help – instead of the more difficult task of understanding a complex reality requiring mental effort and some degree of empathy.

            Liked by 1 person

          22. “SSID payments are draatically reduced if you have other income.”

            Sure, the payments are for people of limited income. The help offered is reduced as you earn income. But not one for one. What you seem oblivious to is that you can be working and still have a limited income. Take the minimum wage ($7.25 / hour) and do the math.

            Liked by 1 person

          23. “recruited by a shyster”

            This is a good example of how unconscious biases can be embedded in the culture without the need to accuse anyone of anything. It is interesting to note it being exhibited by someone who is incensed over the idea that “physician bias” has negative impacts on minorities.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. It must be terrible knowing that your only lame defense is to ignorantly and loosely call people names like hater or racist instead of presenting a cogent counter argument. I think that’s the definition of a chump. Oh look, it is…

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Defense? I was not defending anything.

            I was pointing out how consistently the posts of Dr. Tabor (and the rest of you people) are dripping with hatred. If someone thinks of fellow Americans struggling to get by as “parasites” they are not open to “cogent counter argument.” Period.

            Liked by 2 people

  4. Paul, perhaps you need some glasses. Doc didn’t refer to fellow americans as parasites. He referred to illegal aliens who cross our border to live off welfare as parasites which is true. Look up parasite and I am sure you will find that something that lives off of a host while feeding at the hosts expense is a….parasite!!!


      1. Tis you who is in need of glasses (and not he orange colored ones you normally wear). In his exchange with me, Doc Tabor said “The parasites are BORN here”… THAT would make them Americans, grasshopper.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s