Concerning my stance on immigration pertaining to Texas Law. First let’s take a look at the word “immigration”. The word immigration means “the movement of non-native people into a country in order to settle concerning the country”. Regardless of the physiological awareness meaning what is being felt, a “movement” concerning a group individuals coincide with a word that’s called “migration”. So the word migration is the natural order of all walks of life. My feelings would be supported based on that idea alone meaning what would be the essence of the word “migration”. It may be considered an atrocity to prevent migration from happening.
Pertaining to Texas law in this article the passed bill regardless of any biasness or truth it still would be considered a travesty against amnesty because basically again as I stated this would be an interruption against the world “migration”. The appropriate response would be an elite form of “integrations” meaning a reaffirmation of a group of race.
The effects of course pertaining to Texas residents would be a “damning” however a positive reaffirmation pertaining to a group of people would have to take place. I say this with great conviction concerning the evolution of the human race meaning, in order for the dawn of human awareness’s to keep evolving we must socially interact with all walks of life.
Montgomery, Dave, and Manny Fernandez. “Texas Immigration Bill Draws Protesters to the State Capitol.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 May 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/us/texas-sanctuary-bill-protest.html.
Whether you are arguing for or against immigration, your starting point should always be facts. You might begin by thinking about the history of immigration into Texas. The original inhabitants of Texas, some 11,000 years before the arrival of the Europeans, belonged to such tribes as the Apache, Comanche, Wichita, Coahuiltecan, and Tonkawa. The first European immigrants were the Spanish, who arrived in the sixteenth century. When Mexico became independent from Spain, Texas was part of Mexico, and Anglo settlers, as well as the independence of Texas and its assimilation into the United States, were nineteenth-century phenomena. Thus the first problem in discussing immigration is that any inhabitant of Texas who is not a Native American is descended from immigrants, and that of these immigrants, Hispanic ones arrived considerably earlier than Anglo ones. To be logically and morally consistent, any argument concerning immigration must take into account the fact that the European immigrants, from whom both Anglos and Hispanics descended, were, after all, foreign invaders routinely guilty of rape, murder, theft, and genocide.
In looking at contemporary immigration, at good starting point is looking at economic issues. On the one side, one could argue that immigrants put a strain on public resources, especially since Texas is a low-tax state in which residents are often politically unwilling to support public services through tax revenue. On the other side, one can argue that immigrants are a major factor in the economic boom in Texas and that without their availability for low-wage jobs in industries such as agriculture and construction, the Texas economy would suffer. Most economists believe that immigration has, overall, had a positive effect on the Texas economy as most immigrants contribute more in taxes than they get back in public services (especially in the case of payroll taxes). On a civic level, though, issues such as violent people, such as drug-smugglers, can make the border seem like a war zone, disrupting the lives of local residents.
https://www.thestoryoftexas.com/discover/campfire-stories/native-americans
No comments:
Post a Comment