2 votes

Seems like many here are split on Immigration - Requesting answers from YOU (ALL) *UPDATED*

**I am updating this post because some here, specifically some of those that have refused to answer some of these questions, have whined about this being a "BAIT" piece. Really? Is that the best you got at evading the questions? Can't answer a few questions, huh? Did these particular questions strike a nerve that make it too uncomfortable for you to answer honestly? For those of you that fall into that category, you may want to ask yourselves if perhaps the real reason you're avoiding those questions, while getting so extremely defensive about them, doesn't have to do with something more than you're willing to admit. Sometimes we don't like to be confronted with the ugly truth do we? For some, it's obviously just too much to handle.**:

For those of you that would like to answer objectively, without assumptions and suspicions, by all means.....


Original Post begins now:

Aside from the comments left on this post: http://www.dailypaul.com/280997/anonymous-vs-israel-it-is-on... aside as recent COUNTLESS others;

I have a few questions for some here that oppose "illegal" immigration.

Do you support and abide by tax laws ONLY out of fear of repercussions and penalties?
Do you support the drug laws since drugs are "illegal" by "law"?
Do you support the Constitution and reject Un-Constitutional laws?
Is there a place anywhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights that speaks on "LEGAL" immigration? "The Right To Travel" comes to mind. Think about that one for a second.

Lastly, regardless of whether you support a "law" or not, will you still abide by it due to it being Un-Constitutional? Or does this ONLY apply to the 2nd Amendment with you "Liberty" guys here?

I'm sure some here will most likely argue that the Constitution ONLY applies to Americans. Yet it's those SAME PEOPLE that will many times argue that they are GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, and that they can NOT be infringed on by a government. So which is it?

The point of this post is to possibly help bring us together(even a little), and to help me understand why some here denounce and reject certain laws while supporting certain other laws. Seems hypocritical to me. My fear is that it is only because it affects you personally.

Looking forward to those answers and arguments, with emphasis on certain members here as well that always seem to post/reply on "immigration issues".


What do those of you who oppose immigration want to see happed? Should we not allow anyone to immigrate to the US?
Are you familiar with our current immigration policy and how difficult (nearly impossible) it is for people who are latino and have no higher education to come here?

Also, what do you think should be done about the millions of illegal immigrants who are already here?

Also added is this article by Judge Andrew Napolitano:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yes, I'm in Alabama

And I would say that the article is pretty accurate. My brother in law owned 3-4 chicked houses in NE Alabama at that time and he ended up having to get a different job because the processing plants were not needing as many chickens.

The restaurant where my mom works had a good many Latinos who had been there for 5+ years and ever since then the positions that they held have been like a revolving door. Additionally, it used to take them 45 minutes to an hour to close each night but now it takes at least 1.5 hours every night.

Ron Paul convert from the Heart of Dixie

I have to apologize because my first initial reaction was that

I laughed. And it wasn't meant in a mean spirited kind of way, but more like a "shaking my head" and uttering the word "figures" due to this reply I just wrote and then immediately after, reading yours.

As usual, that's government "solving" our problems (sarcasm). Repeat after me class, "Thank you government".

Concerning the economic effects of amnesty....

US Civil Rights Commission Members: Amnesty Will 'Disproportionately Harm' Black Community


The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Soggy, the problem I have with that article is that

it sounds more like a "theory"/opinion being pushed by the Congressional Black Caucus chairwoman as "fact".

The reason I asked Angie about her "personal experience" regarding the economy was because frankly, I'm tired of FOX saying one thing, and MSNBC saying another. I'm merely using those as examples as I don't watch MSM, but more to illustrate my point of the various conflicting, reports, and opinions that are out there. Here's an example of something that has more historical merit than just this Congressional Black Caucus chairwoman's theory: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-14/amnesty-for-...

I'd also rather take the word of people with proven track records that have thus far been RIGHT, and so far the only ones that have been right on the economy thus far have been people like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, and others that steer clear of Keynesian economics. For example, Peter Schiff discusses the illegal immigrants here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruIRST4NG70&feature=player_em... - and I for one agree with him.

I'll tell you/ask you something else, and I'm not even going to mention statistics or some "pundit's" words from MSM(Lord knows how often they've been right); How many Americans do YOU PERSONALLY KNOW that would give up an actual "paycut" collecting unemployment checks or welfare/food stamps and medicaid for a minimum wage job? I've yet to meet my first one Soggy, and I really can't blame them. All morals aside, they'd be stupid to give up 50 hours worth of time for a minimum wage job, specially someone like a single mom. How many single mothers are out there? They may as well collect welfare and go to school which is what many often do.

Here's a direct quote from that link you provided:
"The Commission members cite a 2008 briefing their body held on this topic which found illegal immigration “has a disparate impact on African-American men because these men are disproportionately represented in the low-skilled labor force.”"

This is just SAD on so many levels. I could easily pull out the "race card" here and ask why they consider African-American men to be "low-skilled"? One would think Blacks would take offense to that statement, no? I'm pretty sure those Black colleges that Rand attended this week would take offense, don't you? Instead I'll ask; When does personal responsibility come in to play? Why are African-American men so "low-skilled" to begin with? Haven't they progressed yet? Is it now the illegals fault that these African-American men are so "low-skilled"? So according to this article you linked, am I to believe that if it weren't for these illegal immigrants, Blacks would be the ones filling the busboy, dishwasher, and hotel maid positions? It's all a tad ridiculous isn't it? Or don't you agree?

I'd also like to point out that according to Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection, since 2007, many illegal aliens have "self-deported" in large numbers both due to the economy of the U.S., as well as some of the recent Anti-Illegal immigration laws that have been passed in some states. Yet, unemployment has continued to rise and the economy has not improved. It's been 6 years, so where's the economic effect of this mass exodus? https://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/july-13-2009/illegal...


“It’s going to cause fruits and vegetables to go up, consumers are going to have to pay more money, that’s the crux of it, because we wont’ be able to grow the amount we have in the past because there won’t be enough labor to do it.”

By the way, I have to thank you Soggy. Because of your response here, I went and searched for an article that I knew would contradict yours, and sure enough, I stumbled on that one above from Business Week, as well as a couple of others that point out that Amnesty has(1986) and most likely will spur the economy. Again, that's just "another" side to the story, and it's not necessarily my opinion either, but I do have to admit that unlike the 70's and the gas crisis, I do remember the 80's and 90's being "prosperous".

The fastest way to get what

The fastest way to get what you want - dilute Americanism. I don't think it is about immigration, it is about seizing America. Bring in people from other countries in large numbers and America disappears making it easier to establish a One World Govt. Every other country has limits on immigration.

What is Americanism??? Waves

What is Americanism???

Waves of immigration are not part of it??? Millions of people from other countries do not created it???

For most of US history, legal immigration was easy: arrive on our shores, prove you have no contagious diseases, and you're in! If today's immigrants only had to do that plus pass a criminal background check, illegal immigration wouldn't be a problem.

In the past millions of people came to America with no money, few skills and zero knowledge of the English language. Under today's immigration laws they'd never get in. with the exception of the African slaves and a few aristocratic English second sons denied an inheritance by primogeniture laws, the people who built America were mostly poor and uneducated. People so miserable in the Old Country they risked everything to journey to America and grab a chance at a new life. Those people built America and "americanism"!

I think you are one of those anti-immigration zealots that think the way to make America great again is to ignore everything that made it great.

Not the same immigrants

Let me ask exactly what form of social welfare there was when these immigrants came from the "Old Country"? Were there the equivalent of EBT cards that allowed them to buy Alcohol, cigarettes, and get a quick hundred to spend at the Indian casino? Only reason I ask is because here in California, that is precisely what is going on. There are laws written to "protect" even questioning what the money goes towards. I'm not in to making blanket statements, but when the "We are all immigrants" argument gets brought up, it is clearly not the same situation.

Good point, now let me ask you;

Do you know what Sanctuary cities are and what purpose they serve? Can we agree that they serve to protect "illegal" aliens from revealing themselves for the purpose of maintaining anonymity and not be deported? "IF" we agree on these statements, then would it make sense for these illegals to go to a government agency, declare themselves illegally present, and request welfare?

Maybe there wasn't social welfare at first for those from the "Old Country". But would it be fair of me to categorize most of them as belonging to the Italian and Irish mob? I know that statement sounds harsh, but was there no social welfare, when the depression hit in 1929? How did many people make due when there were no jobs and their kids were starving? Where am I going with this? Read on.

On one hand we have the EBT card carrying members, and on the other hand we have the mob affiliated leg breakers and "business protection collectors". They both hurt and steal from society at the expense of the innocent. Would you prefer one over the other? If you had to choose, would you prefer the violent mobsters or the social leeches? Yes it's a bit stretched, but made to illustrate a point.

You say "I'm not in to making blanket statements", but it sure sounds like your categorizing all of them as EBT card carrying, alcohol & cigarette using gamblers, when the fact is that many of these illegals hide from any type of government entity out of fear of being deported. Maybe that's the norm in your city, but it's not like that everywhere, and not every illegal is here to bleed the system dry, much in the same way that not everyone from the "Old Country" belonged to the mob. Believe it or not, some actually have pride and frown upon the very idea of it. I apologize in advance if I somehow misread your statement.


It's a hell of a lot easier for them to immigrate here then it is for me to immigrate there.Most countries don't want foreigners moving in.If you are there on vacation,they'll be happy to take your money.But here in america,we let them sneak across our border.The give them citizenship without having to pay taxes.We give them welfare,free schooling,housing assistance....and the list goes on.They send most the money they get to relatives in their home country.
And the people who say they are working jobs that americans won't work.....THAT'S BULLSH*T!!!!How do you know that?Did you go around & ask all americans if they want the job that latino is working?I work in a meat processing plant with a LOT of hispanics.I hear people talk about how hard they work,and that's why they get the jobs.That's BULLSH*T!!!I can assure you,most of them are some of the laziest workers you have ever seen.They call in frequently,they abuse restroom break policies,and most of them have been there forever & have seniority,so they have the lazy jobs.If asked to help with a harder job,they will look right at you & tell you "that's not my job".
To answer your question,I do NOT support the amnesty bill.It is ridiculous.If they want to come here,they need to do it legally.You talk about the right to travel...ok.It has been well known for some time,that most foreigners want to come to america to chase the dream.Well the dream is gone.It is gone because the boat is full.We can't take on anymore passengers without sinking.We're already sinking as it is.There's no welfare left.Obama has given it all to the banker elites & his terrorist friends.
We need to lock our borders down as most other countries have,so we can start working on fixing our communities & stop worrying about everyone elses!!!!

Locked borders not good for trade

I disagree on closing borders, it is bad for trade and bad for our economy. Also countries that trade together have little desire for conflict which is positive. Wide-open borders are not good either. I believe managed borders are good for our country... and we are not doing that very well at the moment.

Agree 100% on communities. A healthy nation is a collection of healthy communities. Charity begins at home.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

You are the only one proposing closed borders to trade

Unless you see illegal aliens as 'trade', no one is even talking about what you are. We close the borders to people trying to break the law. Ilegal aliens are criminals, plain and simple. They broke the law. Period. They deserve no special treatment.
And charity may begin at home, but there's no place for charity from the government. Govt charity is actually 'redistribution of wealth'.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison


The saying "charity begins at home" means to "take care of oneself and onesown first." It has nothing to do with government.

My comment on trade had to do with closed borders. You can make them 100% secure using a heavy hand, sure. An unintended effect: trade will suffer. I prefer managed borders. Today, we have poorly managed borders.

** Reason we don't have a worker visa program is it benefits businesses who benefit from cheap migrant labor and they contribute to campaigns. I have seen it first-hand.

Amnesty - yeah, I appreciate what you say. I know I may not be with the DP majority. I am for amnesty but on the pre-condition that we improve our legal immigration laws and start managing our borders. Reagan gave amensty and made a mistake by not addressing border management. I don't want to repeat the mistake.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Davy Crocketts lesson to Congress about Charity.....

Not yours to give.


The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche

It is mine to give...

...if it is mine in the first place.

Thanks for the link, a good one.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

"countries that trade together have little desire for conflict

which is positive. "

Straight out of the NWO playbook "Tragedy and Hope".

In order to dismantle this country and foster this interdependence (and lack of independence) Quigly wrote "What we need is a political system which allows the people the 'Vote the bums out of office' but our policies remain in place." And that is exactly what we have.

You must be very pleased with the progress which has been made.

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche


We have to export. Our GNP from exports is only +/- 10%. Very low when compared with Germany the #4 global economy for example at almost 80% exports of high-value products.

In comparison, we import way too much. That's our choice and a bad one. I'd prefer to be an export powerhouse.

Dr. Paul on trade, paraphrased: "an isolationsist is someone who doesn't like to trade, doesn't like to travel and they like to put sanctions on different countries. We believe in the opposite, we believe Nixon did the right thing by opening trade doors with China.. getting along with people, trade with people and to practice diplomacy... not building walls around our own country. That is isolationism."

In the good Dr's words start at 1:10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNOMmUQYlC4

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

what we need to 'export'

are all those illegals back to their own country and not give them amnesty.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

Sure as hell is.....

trade numbers are fudged just as much as unemployment numbers. It's all a ruse. Just because someone wants this country to be independent does not make them an isolationist or protectionist. There is no freedom without independence. You take Dr. Paul's statment out of context in this case. He was accused of such sentiment (being an isolationist and / or protectionist) many times during the primary debates (past two election cycles). Trade with China includes relenqueshing all intellectual property rights. You have to be in business with their gov't in order to trade with their people.

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Independence & Interaction

Agree: independence & interaction are not mutually exclusive.

I did not take Dr. Paul out of context. I was highlighting his comments of trade and global interaction.

Trade is real. The unfortunate truth for the USA is we consume more of the world's products than we export and we pay for it through easy credit and a debt-laden American consumer. I'd like to reverse the trend.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Mixed Bag

1. Illegal immigration has been designed by many in the business community who depend on cheap labor to supress costs. Both the Republicans and Democrats are in bed on this. If we can run a global empire we could also control our borders if it were a priority. It is not. Let's change that.

2. Immigrants already here illegally: This won't be popular on the DP but I agree with Reagan, give them amnesty and get them registered. I believe the majority are decent people living in the shadows and contributing. Law enforcement confirms that organized crime also lives in the same dark place. Anyone in the SW has seen it. Amnesty will force these people out of the shadows and we can separate the wheat from the chaf so to speak... let's deport the criminals.

3. Immigration - absolutely for it. We should be attracting the worlds best and brightest to our country. It requires the right reform. I support the Startup Visa Act which is a bi-partisan bill supported by entrepreneurs and venture capital: http://startupvisa.com/

4. Worker Visas - seasonal jobs and certain sectors such as meat packing, etc.. depend on migrant labor. Rather than force illegal entry why not grant work visas and allow US firms to recruit and sponsor migrant workers?

5. No amnesty program until the border is secured & a worker visa program is implemented.

6. Support Mexico. Legalize drugs in the USA and end the MX drug war. Build greater trade with Mexico so people can find jobs there and not come to the USA to look for work. A weak Mexico means people will risk coming to the USA illegally. But the illegals are not only Mexican, they are Central Americans. Mexico is struggling to keep its southern border controlled. Instability drives people north. WTF are we wasting time in the Middle East when would would see greater ROI by engaging our southern neighbors with trade ?

OK, let it rip...

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

disagree on illegals already here

As far as most of them being decent people,I'll allow that there are some.I work with a few who are good people & hard,honest working men/women.I will not go so far as to say that is the majority!As in my previous post,most are lazy & worthless.My community draws them in to work at the meat processing plant.There is a lot of gang activity here.All latino gangs.People have their lives threatened regularly.There are occasional stabbings at the plant that always seem to involve hispanics,not whites.
Now don't be mistaken & think I'm a bigot.I am not.My great grandparents were KKK.My grandfather disowned them(his own parents)because of this.I was never more proud then of my grandfather when he told me of his position on this ugly part of our family history.I believe everyone has the right to pursue happiness......LEGALLY!!!!
I agree 100% with point #6,you make!

A couple of questions for you dalek67 if you don't mind;

"As far as most of them being decent people,I'll allow that there are some.I work with a few who are good people & hard,honest working men/women."

Had you never had the opportunity to work with some of these people, in other words, you never would have interacted with any Hispanic person, do you think that you would have had the same opinion? Or do you think that by actually getting to know some, your opinion was somewhat affected?

"There is a lot of gang activity here. All latino gangs.People have their lives threatened regularly.There are occasional stabbings at the plant that always seem to involve hispanics,not whites."

I don't doubt you for a second as I've had to deal with that crap as well, but I DO think that a lot of it has to do with demographics. For example, I was born and raised in NYC. When I lived in the predominantly "Black" areas of it, MOST to ALL crime committed was done by Blacks. Now that doesn't make me a racist for stating a FACT. I LIVED IT, as you are now. Same for when I lived in Hispanic areas. Same for many friends I had that lived in Chinatown(HUGE Chinese gang problems back then).

Now let's flip the scenario and go back a few years. Black families living in the 1950's in the predominant South. Do you see where I'm going with this? Is it fair for the Blacks confined to that area of the country in those days to say that all, or at the very least "most" Whites in the rest of the country are racist and commit crimes against Blacks as well on the same level?

different versions of fairness

Ecard, There you go again with your anti-Randian obsession with fairness but thanks for admitting that not all illegal aliens are model citizens. We do need immigrants. Bill Gates and others involved with computers and science warn us about what will happen if people are forced out of the Country and suggest larger quotas of immigrants with skillsets. Those decisions are made by Congress. But do we really need more unskilled and uneducated illegal aliens to compete with unskilled Americans? We already have a glut of them. Let me describe another "fairness" scenario.I think that it is "unfair' when I see construction crews, restaurant help, landscaping workers who can hardly speak English knowing that they have replaced blacks, students, and part-time workers. So our kids sit around playing computer games not learning to work and then they have to depend on government largess to get through college owing lots of money. The countenance of Illegal aliens leads to expanded government because they use more tax resources then they pay taxes, Americans are forced into unemployment or welfare, and our kids don't get work experience and take government loans. My version of fairness has to do with being fair to poor Americans. Your loyalties seem to be more international, at out expense, and expand government.

Criminal Element

The Latin criminal element is extreme. Only those with a clean history would be granted residency. I believe amnesty would expose the criminal element.

Reagan's plan affected a lot of illegal Irish immigrants in the 80's. In that group were IRA elements raising funds and shipping arms to Northern Ireland. The British were leaning hard on Reagan to do something about it. Amnesty exposed them.

But I would not consider it until the borders were secured and controlled. They are not. We can't promote legal immigration until we address the borders and reform IMO.

There are no easy answers, the reason every president since Reagan kicked the can down the road... and look where we are now.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Article I, section 8: The

Article I, section 8:

The Congress shall have Power... To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.

So, yes, congress makes the laws that define who is a citizen. You can't come here in violation of our immigration laws and demand to be made a citizen. (But plenty of people try.)

Article IV, section 4:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;

Mexico is the only nation on earth that makes territorial claims against the United States. It is the only nation that teaches its citizens that large parts of the U.S. properly belong to them. We have had an unarmed invasion from Mexico going on for decades, and the states have been utterly unprotected from this invasion.

I never claimed to be a libertarian. I agree with them on many issues but disagree with them on others. A country with open borders is no longer a country. The end of the United States as a nation would be fine by many anarcho-libertarians, but it's not fine by me.

Is quoting the Constitution appropriate on a site which is

"Dedicated to Restoring Constitutional Government to the United States of America" ?

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Open boarders.

We don't need no freaking walled up boarders.


I have to say, I was never for it but only in lawful terms like any other nation in the world offers. I'm older then most of you here I think, and I see a different America now. When I grew up and where I grew up was mostly a white area. I see the white population dying off now. I don't know why but I guess they all choose not to have children. I don't think it's right to give America away to lawless people either. When the Europeans came here they built it to a grand success. And yes, they did fight off indians to take most of the land but also paid millions to own the southwest to Mexico in the Guadelupe Hildago Treaty. To watch it fall is a hard thing to witness. I believe all should follow the rule of law just as the other countries around the world have and do have in their countries. Our immigration system is easier then most in the world so why do you think the immigration process should be easier??? Abide by the laws like all the other immigrants have to enter America is fair.

Some points;

"To watch it fall is a hard thing to witness."

I agree, but to place the blame solely on illegal immigrants is nothing but scapegoating by the government and MSM. Do you honestly believe if we hadn't ever had ONE illegal crossing that we wouldn't be in the economic mess we are in now, due to Wall Street, the Banking cartel, our failed and costly foreign policy, corrupt politicians/corporations and the Federal Reserve? All of the things I just mentioned have had a much stronger effect on our economy. Do you believe in bailouts? If you don't, then would you also agree with this: http://www.dailypaul.com/280592/16-giant-corporations-that-h...

Our immigration system is easier then most in the world so why do you think the immigration process should be easier???

1.) Most countries DO NOT require entry Visas, unlike the U.S.
2.) Let me know how many "south of the border" or third world countries you can find on this list: http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/without/without_1990.html#...
3.) It is NOT as economically feasible for people from third world countries to glide through the immigration process as it is for say someone from England or France.

For example; here's a link to the fees FROM INDIA TO THE U.S.

You will notice that depending on the type of Visa, the prices range from $160 - $350. And that's ONLY the APPLICATION fee which is MANY times rejected and you're still out the fee. There are other ridiculously large (filing)fees that are tied to other forms required as well. "IF" they choose to APPLY for Residency (can still be rejected and you're out the cash) the fee runs about $1100. The AVERAGE MONTHLY Indian salary last year was 5,000 Rupees, which equal to roughly $91 U.S. Dollars. That's "MONTHLY" salary.

Feel free to look up the various forms and associated fees if you so wish.

I'd like to add this reply I gave to someone previously as well for you to consider:

I don't think that the answer is to necessarily break the immigration laws simply because they are unfair to some and geared towards others. However, for someone that doesn't really know what the full immigration process entails and how it differs from one country to the next without actually knowing the facts is preposterous at best.

It's hilarious to see people

It's hilarious to see people at a "liberty site" advocating ideas like "citizenship." Right there you prove to any serious student of freedom you don't know the first thing about what it means. You're just like every other statist who wants a big government for the "things he approves of" while wanting to minimize it for the "other people's bad ideas." They are all bad ideas!

A free man is only free if he can come and go as he pleases without checking in at arbitrary checkpoints with equally arbitrary government goons. Cheap labor built this nation and it can rebuild it, unless you really don't believe in free markets too? But of course you do, right?

Liberty site! LOL

"In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written."

~ Ron Paul, End the Fed