Contra liberals, the right half of the IQ bell curve takes the basis to be incidence in the criminal population, rather than the population as a whole. Granted, this is a somewhat recursive definition, and in principle police could manipulate it by intentionally busting those of a given demographic out of proportion to their population.

This objection could be met by making the basis reported crimes, the logic being that gaming the statistic would then necessitate coordinated action by vast numbers of people who have no contact with each other. In any case, as a practical matter, the police clearly do nothing of the kind. Blacks are disproportionately involved in crime (hence the dangerous nature of black neighborhoods), Muslims are disproportionately involved in terrorism, males are disproportionately involved in both cases, as are the young.

General comment on the false kindness of the bishops: The US economy can indeed absorb many immigrants every year. If we didn’t have so many illegals, we could then accept more legally from around the globe. So each illegal Mexican is taking the spot here that could have been had legally by a Croatian man or a nice lady from the Philippines. They also have families and want a better life. To be kind to one undeserving is often(not always) to be cruel to one deserving.

Also, it’s not very global or multicultural to take mostly Mexicans, is it? I’m partial to Eastern Europeans, myself.

I was expressing my inner Archie Bunker. in the cold light of day, both my ideas stink. I quibbled about “impounding” because of the obvious corruption that would result. The banking lobby would savagely resist any such idea. Nothing would come of it.

If the billions of $$$ were stopped – say with a hefty tax on all money transfers between non-US citizens that involves money leaving the country – that may also reduce the incentive for illegal aliens to come here so they can ship money back to Mexico.

They are sucking huge amounts of cash out of our local economies at a time we need every penny we can scrounge to get our own economic house in order.

“But wait, the sainted FDR refused the St. Louis passengers admittance to the USA. They were next turned away from Cuba as well, and were ultimately returned to Germany. Most died in the camps. Well.”

I’d say a distinction could be made between a specific identifiable group being targeted for extermination being extended a bit of humanitarian asylum, and 10%, 20%, 30%, or more of Mexico’s population illegally entering the US and staying.

There’s the matter of scale, and it’s not an automatic death sentence if they are sent back to Mexico.

These people are not refugees of a horrible regime trying to exterminate them, they are economic opportunists.

They are leaving a nation rich both in resources as well as opportunities that their own government and society has completely screwed up – and one of my concerns is they will simply replicate that same situation here in the US that they left in Mexico.

As to solutions, JTR hits the general mark when referring to “reduce, not eliminate.” (I don’t know about the specific impounding solution.) Resist the temptation to try and find encompassing big-idea interventions. Things that reduce the problem, such as fences, employer sanctions, or intervention against drug cartels are all good. Don’t ask of any set of solutions that they solve everything. Accept that with a poor country on a long southern border, we will always have something of a problem. Think reduction.

The numbers increase everday. Huge groups hang out at corners looking for work. Vagrancy laws seemingly have been abolished, driving without a U.S. license, not a problem. The police are reticent to do anything about any of it.

A perfect example of what i mentioned in my post, above, about “enclaves of unassimilated culture,” and “the creation of a permanent underclass of people unassimilated from, and alienated from, the larger culture.”

The growing influence of La Raza is another example.

Don’t misunderstand me: I sympathize with those coming to this country looking for a better life. My parents did that. But these examples show what happens when immigration is not done in an organized manner, with limits to entry, and with assimilation as the ultimate goal.

Allowing the disfunction created by large numbers of unassimilated, alienated groups will not help either the prospective immigrants themselves, nor those of any ethnicity already here. It will destroy the very things that have made this country such a desirable place to live. Our good will should not become a “suicide pact.”

Occam’s Beard- I perked up when I read this comment. And I agree, not just with regard to this issue, but to many others.

I have come to see that there are too many taboo subjects that just cannot be touched upon because its considered un-PC or impolite to talk about. Its like the “third rail,” you can’t touch it.

This has lead to many viewpoints (which are after all, just viewpoints… subjective opinion) which have been taken to be unspoken “givens”…. they “go without saying.” In particular, a particular viewpoint (usually the left of center one) on a lot of ethnic, racial, or class issues are now considered to be “givens,” …. they “go without saying.”

One of my favorites is the statement often injected into many a discussion by many a liberal that “you know, this is a racist country. . .”, as if all the misfortunes that befall any particular ethnic group are all the result of white racism.

I have found that one way to break the notion that some idea is a given is to brashly break it with a blunt statement… such as you said: “F–k the poor.” Once you break that taboo, then one can deal with the subtle points in the discussion.