Going to be honest, I'm going to put this on my list of things that he's done that I like (yes, there is a list, though it is sparse).

Obviously, it would be better if it came with plans to reform the immigration system. But, I'll take it for now.

EDIT: A source on this:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/06/15/155091639/report-deportations-of-law-abiding-younger-illegal-immigrants-to-stop

- Kantor.

I like the idea as well. One of the right wing ideas I dislike (especially since even UKIP espouse it) is this unconditional hatred of immigrants. They provide labour, and quite often can start their own businesses.

If they're just going on welfare, they shouldn't really be here/there, but if they are willing to work to earn their keep, then the USA would do well to have them.

Seems like he's trying to outmaneuver Romney vis-a-vis Marco Rubio's immigration proposal, since (as far as i can understand it) Rubio's idea seems to be "the DREAM Act without a path to citizenship" which is exactly what Obama seems to be doing, except with slightly different qualifications.

It is the right thing to do morally, and a shrewd election-year move to boot.

I've edited a source into your OP, in case people hadn't heard about this.

Yeah, I stopped caring about motives a while ago. Everything a polician ever does is to get re-elected, that's their incentive. With politics, you should always look at the ends, rather than the means.

I don't think we'll know Romney's true policy on immigration until after the nomination. It's something that he's tried to avoid as much as possible in the primaries (my observation), so I'm guessing his policy won't be of "conservative taste".

People opposed to immigration on economic grounds tend to fall into the seen/unseen fallacy (so, they see an immigrant working a job, but they don't see the other jobs that the immigrant has created through their consumption- typically, it works out that for every job taken by an immigrant, a new job is created elsewhere).

That's what I've been saying for a long time. The USA/UK doesn't have an immigration problem, they have welfare problems.

fixed

Haven't heard of it.

Personally, I'm for Amnesty, but ONLY after the borders have been secured. Since all this would do is GREATLY incentivise illegal immigration for the "second wave" of amnesty... and honestly, I find illegal immigration unfair to other immigrants and think it greatly limits the number of legal immigrants we allow in the country.

Also, illegal immigrants pretty much just an allowed "underclass" to be abused by the rich and middle class by underpaying them for unreported work.


EDIT: Oh he's just not deporting people who were brought here illegally as children. No big deal really. Just a political move to cut off Romney stealing the Hispanic vote with Rubio.

I don't really care one way or another.

EDIT 2: "Illegal immigrants will avoid deportation and be eligible for work permits if they arrived in the U.S. before age 16, are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military."

How the fuck are illegal immigrants serving in the military?    

Outside that.  Seems... like a made up ploy not meant to be used... since those terms seem pretty impossible to prove in 90% of cases.

How do you prove you arrived before 16 if your over 21?  Not like your documented anywhere... ,   How do you prove you've been here for at least 5 continious years?   Again, your not documented anywhere, even if you lived in the same place for 5 years you have no SSID or anything....

Yeah, it's not a proper amnesty, hence the quotation marks in the title.

However, I would imagine most people who are opposed to amnesty would also be opposed to this, and vice versa. Which is where I'm expecting the thread to go.

Probably.

I always find Immigration funny.... because I tend to be for a lot stricter immigration stuff like republicans... however my reasoning behind it is something that would be considered mostly liberal in reasoning.

Main points being.

A) You can't have 100% unrestricted free immigration, it just wouldn't work and a limit needs to be set.

B) The Census keeps track of illegal immigration, and counts illegal immigrants on the US Census, so therefore there numbers are factored into the official government numbers for growth when deciding immigration policy.

C) It's unfair that poor people get an advantage over other poor people simply because they live closer.

D) Illegal Immigrants live lives well below that of a normal Immigrant because they are mostly barred from society, and from anything higher up then a menial minium wage style job.

Main conclusion?  We should have much tighter boarder control so that the immigrants who come here can lead full productive lives and aren't priortized by location and willingness to risk your life.