Anchor babies... are they a good thing?

First of all, it is a woeful mis-interpretation of the 14th Amendment, that makes such babies automatically US citizens:

<<

This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.

>> Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan -- The very author of the citizenship clause ¹

Second, you are most misinformed about who gives birth in America -- it is increasingly the well-off women, not the "poor and uneducated"².

And third, I don't mind such babies as long as their parents pay for themselves (and their children). This is the case with the wealthy Chinese you are describing, but not, unfortunately, with most of the Mexicans, whose child bearing, birthing, and rearing are paid for (in full or in part) by the US taxpayers.

In fact, the very term "anchor baby"³ is hardly applicable to the wealthy Asians -- unlike the poor Mexicans, they don't need their American-born baby to anchor them into the US...

MSNBC know this and deliberately misuse the term to confuse you and the 11 other people, who still read them.

The article I read says the Chinese government frowns on this, and makes it hard for the child to get Chinese citizenship and get back into China. Those babies would not be real Americans. They will not put America first, vote in American elections, or serve in the U S military [ the mothers cannot get permission to stay to raise the child, so the children will have minimal desire to move back to the U S as adults.]

China is a rising country, while America is a declining country.

I don't give a damn if the are Donald Trump rich, we need to do away with the 14th amendment.For every "rich" person coming here to have an American baby there are at least 1000 coming here to have babies so they can eat off the tax payers of America.

Nice little Chinese "anchor babies" - brought up as good little communists. Then sent back to the US, to go to college and then become a politician - Senator or Congressman, or EVEN - the PRESIDENT!

Hopefully, before that happens, we will have learned from history about electing a President whose loyalties may be divided.

The problem is that people who are skirting the immigration laws usually do not fit your 3 categories of crititeria. Here in the South, we are overrun by Mexican nationals who openly hate Anglos, who refuse to become part of society by speaking English, who do not obey laws, do not pay taxes and have no potential "to generate economic acitivity." They and their little illegimate brats are a drain on our society.

Granting citizenship by place of birth is rooted in Medieval feudalism and a disgrace for a modern country. Most developed countries have abolished it.

I see nothing wrong with this. In the article, it says that these people are not giving anything back in return. WTF ,is buying many fancy clothes and going on shopping sprees not considered as helping our economy. They pay to deliver here. They are not trying to take advantage of services here for their baby. And the child comes back to US when it is of high school age. We hear so much about people adopting babies from China so what is the problem here.