Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

There should be a distinction between immigrant and guest

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • There should be a distinction between immigrant and guest

    Hello there:

    There are discussions and discussions over and over. However there is some capital point which is always overlooked, also in the law. They always talk about immigrants while most of the time only guests are referred to. Indeed, what is an immigrant? An immigrant is somebody who leaves the country where he lives, most of the time his native country, to go, and TRANSPLANT HIS ROOTS in another country. An immigrant has no intent ever to go back to live in his original country. He adopts his new country as his home and wants to grow old there, see his children and grand children grow up and, ultimately, be laid to rest in this new country of his choice.

    All the others are no immigrants but temporary residents, guests to be polite. It is this last group which contains also the most troublesome individuals. Why, because they do not give for the country they come to, their home country, the country they love, is their country of origin. They only come, most of the time, just to "milk" this country and take advantage (and sometimes abuse) the riches it offers. To them it is like going to another state to work, not their choice, but because the pay is better there. Most of them don't even resent being sent back as they are sent back home, courtesy of the country they abused. They almost regard it as a free service.

    The lawmakers should make more distinction between those two groups. I am aware that it is very difficult to do this. A solution, as a layman, could be a temporary legal residence. For example, first step three years, after those three years, show at least working knowledge of the local language and some form of integration into the society. Then five years after which one has to become citizen or leave. Naturally in between one should keep its "nose clean" no major criminal offences.

    Another problem is, as quoted in one of the posts, the continuous flow of money out of the country, mostly from "guests" to their homeland. The European Union has a system on that to slow it down at least. To send money out of the country one has to provide proof of legal residence. As said, if it does not curb it completely, at least it is a step in the right direction and slows it down.

    To me, the first and utmost this is to separate the "caff from the corn" and make a clear distinction between and immigrant and a guest, it would go a long way to aleviate or ease many of the problems. An immigrant loves per definition his new country and wants to keep it clean, it is his HOME country now. A guest most, if not all, do not care of the time.

    So that's my two cents worth on a topic which seems to be overlooked too much and which seems to be at the root of the problems. I am also aware that I generalized here and that, in both groups, there are exceptions, but these are rare and would not really influence the outcome. As Plato once said in one of his works on the law: "...it is impossible to make a law that fits everybody and every situation all of the time..." that is why there is a thing as equity in modern law and that's why we have judges to "judge" in what degree that law is applicalbe to the particular situation.

    Take care, God bless.

    Andre

  • #2
    Hello there:

    There are discussions and discussions over and over. However there is some capital point which is always overlooked, also in the law. They always talk about immigrants while most of the time only guests are referred to. Indeed, what is an immigrant? An immigrant is somebody who leaves the country where he lives, most of the time his native country, to go, and TRANSPLANT HIS ROOTS in another country. An immigrant has no intent ever to go back to live in his original country. He adopts his new country as his home and wants to grow old there, see his children and grand children grow up and, ultimately, be laid to rest in this new country of his choice.

    All the others are no immigrants but temporary residents, guests to be polite. It is this last group which contains also the most troublesome individuals. Why, because they do not give for the country they come to, their home country, the country they love, is their country of origin. They only come, most of the time, just to "milk" this country and take advantage (and sometimes abuse) the riches it offers. To them it is like going to another state to work, not their choice, but because the pay is better there. Most of them don't even resent being sent back as they are sent back home, courtesy of the country they abused. They almost regard it as a free service.

    The lawmakers should make more distinction between those two groups. I am aware that it is very difficult to do this. A solution, as a layman, could be a temporary legal residence. For example, first step three years, after those three years, show at least working knowledge of the local language and some form of integration into the society. Then five years after which one has to become citizen or leave. Naturally in between one should keep its "nose clean" no major criminal offences.

    Another problem is, as quoted in one of the posts, the continuous flow of money out of the country, mostly from "guests" to their homeland. The European Union has a system on that to slow it down at least. To send money out of the country one has to provide proof of legal residence. As said, if it does not curb it completely, at least it is a step in the right direction and slows it down.

    To me, the first and utmost this is to separate the "caff from the corn" and make a clear distinction between and immigrant and a guest, it would go a long way to aleviate or ease many of the problems. An immigrant loves per definition his new country and wants to keep it clean, it is his HOME country now. A guest most, if not all, do not care of the time.

    So that's my two cents worth on a topic which seems to be overlooked too much and which seems to be at the root of the problems. I am also aware that I generalized here and that, in both groups, there are exceptions, but these are rare and would not really influence the outcome. As Plato once said in one of his works on the law: "...it is impossible to make a law that fits everybody and every situation all of the time..." that is why there is a thing as equity in modern law and that's why we have judges to "judge" in what degree that law is applicalbe to the particular situation.

    Take care, God bless.

    Andre

    Comment


    • #3
      an 'immigrant' is somebody that has played by the rules to take up residence in another country...a guest is a temporary visitor/student/worker who once again, has obeyed the rules of the country in which he/she is carrying out the lawful activity as prescribed by that country's visa policies...a dirtbag illegal is an irresponsible pile of manure that has no respect for the laws of any nation (including their own), and wants only to leech off of hard-working taxpayers of the country in which the same dirtbag snuck into by any means other than a legal one.

      Comment


      • #4
        Immigrants are those who come to the US by any means. A guest is someone like you who abuses the privileges given by Discussion Boards like this one.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hello:
          I am only talking about legal cases, illegals are illegal by any definition and are not considered here.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hello:
            Appatrently you did not read correctly. Immigrants are people who move their roots and come in a legal way, so do guests but only in a temporary way. Illegals are just that, illegal come to any country by any means and way to abuse it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hello again:

              Also, Mr. Rough Neighbor, son-of-an-immigrant, please enlighten me in what way did I abuse this board? I was under the impression its main object is to discuss immigraton issues, this is, as far as I know, what I did.

              Andre, son-of-another-immigrant

              Comment


              • #8
                Ow, you're talking to me. Sorry, don't take me seriously. I didn't write it seriously either. And I was not referring to you about the abuse of this board. And I'm not a Mr.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hello Rough Neigbor:

                  Apologies accepted, but please do not muddle this board by writing things you do not mean, OK? And, sorry about the Mr., I couldn't see it from here. . . .

                  Andre

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks for the forgiveness. You joined this board before I did, but I can see a small number of your total posts. The only thing is that I think I don't deserve your "admonition" of not "muddling" this board again. I may for that single post, but that message was not even addressed to you but rather to another poster who may deserve such label more.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hello Rough Neighbor:

                      No problem, what you are saying: not adressed to me etc, is also hard to see from here and, I erred also in generalizing, as some people seem to use this board to vent whatever they have on their stomach. Please note I DO NOT imply you do this, just explaining why I generalized.

                      Indeed I do not post very often, just for that reason, it is so hard to get a healty discussion going.

                      Take Care

                      Ande

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        People improperly use the word immigrant just as they use the word black (or white) as an everyday non-technical word. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary; an immigrant is a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence. This also applies legally as in immigrant visa and non-immigrant visa. In the immigration legalese the word immigrant is used in this context if used at all (mostly used to describe visas). Rather the word alien is used with classifications; resident- , non-resident, or illegal- alien.

                        I am quite sure others are wondering where the black context fits in; well, when you say black you are essentially generalizing a whole different set of people with varying cultures, beliefs, backgrounds, etc. An african-american is not the same as a cuban black, neither are they the same as carribean black, neither are they all the same as an african. Neither of them have the same cultures, beliefs, or way of life. This also does not mean that a cuban black who has american citizenship is now african american - he is definitely not...he does not share any common life values, background, or way of life. He is Cuban-American.

                        So one could say the everyday use of the word immigrant or black is politically incorrect.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andre:
                          Hello there:

                          There are discussions and discussions over and over. However there is some capital point which is always overlooked, also in the law. They always talk about immigrants while most of the time only guests are referred to. Indeed, what is an immigrant? An immigrant is somebody who leaves the country where he lives, most of the time his native country, to go, and TRANSPLANT HIS ROOTS in another country. An immigrant has no intent ever to go back to live in his original country. He adopts his new country as his home and wants to grow old there, see his children and grand children grow up and, ultimately, be laid to rest in this new country of his choice.

                          All the others are no immigrants but temporary residents, guests to be polite. It is this last group which contains also the most troublesome individuals. Why, because they do not give for the country they come to, their home country, the country they love, is their country of origin. They only come, most of the time, just to "milk" this country and take advantage (and sometimes abuse) the riches it offers. To them it is like going to another state to work, not their choice, but because the pay is better there. Most of them don't even resent being sent back as they are sent back home, courtesy of the country they abused. They almost regard it as a free service.

                          The lawmakers should make more distinction between those two groups. I am aware that it is very difficult to do this. A solution, as a layman, could be a temporary legal residence. For example, first step three years, after those three years, show at least working knowledge of the local language and some form of integration into the society. Then five years after which one has to become citizen or leave. Naturally in between one should keep its "nose clean" no major criminal offences.

                          Another problem is, as quoted in one of the posts, the continuous flow of money out of the country, mostly from "guests" to their homeland. The European Union has a system on that to slow it down at least. To send money out of the country one has to provide proof of legal residence. As said, if it does not curb it completely, at least it is a step in the right direction and slows it down.

                          To me, the first and utmost this is to separate the "caff from the corn" and make a clear distinction between and immigrant and a guest, it would go a long way to aleviate or ease many of the problems. An immigrant loves per definition his new country and wants to keep it clean, it is his HOME country now. A guest most, if not all, do not care of the time.

                          So that's my two cents worth on a topic which seems to be overlooked too much and which seems to be at the root of the problems. I am also aware that I generalized here and that, in both groups, there are exceptions, but these are rare and would not really influence the outcome. As Plato once said in one of his works on the law: "...it is impossible to make a law that fits everybody and every situation all of the time..." that is why there is a thing as equity in modern law and that's why we have judges to "judge" in what degree that law is applicalbe to the particular situation.

                          Take care, God bless.

                          Andre </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
                          Immigratino code, pased by lawmakers, already make the distinction between immigrant and nonimmigrant. This site has general information.

                          The problem is with the media and the general public. The media generally sensationalizes stories about immigrants, whether for good or bad, and the general public really do not know the specifics of the law and rely on the "experts." So, when a politician has to speak to the crowd, the politician will use terms, phrases, and themes that are easy for the public to understand, follow, and be swayed. And in reality, a majority of the public do not know anything of how a person could immigrate or what conditions that person will need to follow to comply with the law.
                          "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Andre, temporary residents or "guests" are ususally in transition to become LPRs. Also, some temporary residents or "guests" are here on certain visas that do not lead to green card such as TN visa, E-2 visa, etc however they can remain on those visas and some indef.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              @ Jeff "temporary residents or "guests" are ususally in transition to become LPRs." That assertion is not true, there is really no category called "temporary residents" but there is in deed. Diplomats and F1 student visa holders for example are temporarily here for as long as they go to school (2yrs, 4yrs, 6yrs, 8yrs, etc) so they tend to be temporary residents indeed but such classification does not exist. And they are not usually in transition to LPR status because when they finish their purpose here they are expected to return to their countries.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X