Jesse, did they ever figure out what the maple smell was in NYC?

It was coming from New Jersey, wasn't it?

Yeah, a factory processing tamarind, or something like that.

or was it fenugreek, which actually does smell mapley.

Fenugreek sounds right.

I'm pretty sure that one company made a nasty NYC smell perfume.

Bond NYC, and it's pricy: [link]

Yes, it was a fenugreek factory.

I was actually thinking of Demeter, but I guess not. [link]

Billytea, yes - and to do that you have to have enforced/enforceable laws/policies.

Quite so, and part of my point. Though my use of the term 'manage' rather than, say, 'control' or 'enforce' was deliberate.

However, no one in this conversation, nor in the wider political discourse, is proposing the abolition of immigration (explicitly or de facto), so that's a minor point at best. The more important point is that immigration law should be based on the same principles as the rest of the legal system. More important questions include, is the current law just? Is it discriminatory? Does it deny due process? Does it violate human rights? Does it violate international treaties? Is it proportional to the offence? (More controversially, I remain interested too in its degree of compassion, its social implications and its economic implications.

The AZ law, IMO, is bad law on these considerations. But my point is that the significant elements in both our countries that demonise illegal immigrants make such rational discourse and analysis of the situation difficult at best. We wind up with law and law enforcement that violates the principles on which our countries were founded and are detrimental to our countries' interests.

The alienating (so to speak) rhetoric is IMO the element that most threatens effective management of immigration policy. And while I can't speak for the US on this point, it's been immensely damaging to Australian values. Immigration itself has not. Australia is a far more open and confident member of the international community thanks to our immigrants. The current environment threatens exactly that.

Billytea, you most logically stated several points that I completely agree with, as do I agree with (More controversially, I remain interested too in whether it's compassionate, its social implications and its economic implications.

Well, and then the other question is, if you break the law, what are the penalties? I think many of us obviously feel that part of the answer is changing the immigration laws in terms of what makes an immigrant "illegal", but also...there are lots of laws people break, every day, here. Sometimes the penalty is a fine (traffic tickets). Sometimes it's community service. Sometimes it's probation, or jail time. Does the penalty for illegal immigration need to be "Go back to where you came from and NEVER COME BACK"?