Theyve Come for Us All

What Cook fails to grasp by writing of a “split on immigration between the GOP’s business faction and its culturally conservative base” is the potential political genius that could underlie this latest legislation.  This is typical of so-called progressives to be so politically blind and unimaginative.

By allowing for illegal immigrants to be arrested, rather than merely deported, would enable us to expand prison labor projects by outsourcing these prisoners - we could call them ‘special prisoners’, i.e. not really dangerous and good at unskilled labor - to the very jobs they were previously performing.  Prison labor has a long and rich precedent in our great country, but we have previously been loath to have them in our homes, our yards, our kitchens, and our construction yards.  These special prisoners can fill that void.

Business owners and corporations could then legally take advantage of this labor force (no more looking themselves in the mirror in shame!), and at costs beyond - or below - their wildest dreams.  More prisons will have to built, naturally by the prisoners themselves. 

At any rate, the fears of both ends of the conservative spectrum will be allayed, and our economy will soar.  The only X factor would of course be the 13th amendment, but I’m confident our current Supreme Court will review this series of legislation favorably.

Good luck in ‘06, hippies!  Yeehaw! (guns a-poppin’)

Wow,

Are we reduced to slavery?

Deporting illegal aliens is reasonable, I suppose (It doesn’t really solve the problem. More will be coming over the border the next day), but arresting them is ridiculous. Would you lock a kid up who just came into your yard to retrieve a baseball, or something? Of course not.

And then Rocco’s idea of arresting them and making the illegal aliens work for us is even worse. Vanella said it earlier. It’s slavery. Wouldn’t giving jobs to the unemployed be a bit more helpful for everyone involved?

This country was founded on the belief that all men were created equal, right? Then we should start acting like it was.

We need to just built the wall and keep out anyone from crossing the border.  Very simple....

What Rocco is advocating would be a form of slavery. It’s reminiscent of a time when the poor were arrested for debt and forced to work for substandard wages until they paid off their debts or died. Deportation isn’t helping, arresting illegal immigrants is immoral and illogical, and building a wall is obviously impractical.

The only real way to discourage illegal immigration is to fight global poverty. If people could find jobs, justice, safety, and freedom in their own countries, they wouldn’t have to come here, to the land of the hypocritical and the home of the corrupt republican party.

Of course, when we say that the country was founed on the idea that all men were created equally, they really meant all white, male landowners. They weren’t talking about racial minorities, sexual minorities, women, the disabled, the poor, or any other group that we’re so fond of marginalizing and exploiting for our own financial gain. We’ve never been interested in real solutions to problems, just more ways to make a quick buck.

Rocco,

I loved the sarcasm.

----------------
This whole issue is so unreal, yet so in-you-face every day.
To balance some of the glib comments on this post so far, here are a few I’ve run across elsewhere:

“Just fill the Rio Grande with alligators and piranhas.”

“You only have to shoot the first one.”
----------------
This is a genuine problem and likely to become more of a political hot potato. I watched four law officers from our southern border states testify at a Senate hearing on C-SPAN a few weeks ago. While most of these people may be harmless, those smuggling them into the country are extremely dangerous thugs - willing to shoot our Border Patrol and care nothing for the lives of their “cargo.”

They told of rapes, murders, drugs, armed men dressed as Mexican Soldiers who threatened an officer (luckily in plain clothes at the time) and a lack of cooperation from the Mexican government.

When asked the affect of the Bush 41 amnesty the reply was, “When you made millions of illegals legal, you invited millions more.” and “They used to run we they saw us, now they shoot.” also “We are out manned and out gunned.”

----------------
“Anti-immigration groups often talk about the rule of law, but here we are passing laws that nobody believes are going to be enforced.”

Maybe no one believes it because our immigration laws have been ignored for decades. We are all of immigrant stock, but this is not the issue.  Calling them “undocumented immigrants” is dodging the fact — we’re talking about those people who are breaking our laws upon entering.

----------------
Deporting illegal aliens is reasonable, I suppose (It doesn’t really solve the problem. More will be coming over the border the next day), but arresting them is ridiculous. Would you lock a kid up who just came into your yard to retrieve a baseball, or something? Of course not.

We’re not talking about kids playing — it’s closer to someone moving into your house, sitting at your table or your workplace, getting line ahead of your kids at the Social Security office or college and because the raked your yard they are now entitled to be written into your will.

Thank Jimmy Carter for giving them Social Security at age 65 just like those of us who were drafted or paid into it all of our lives.

Try slipping into the Rose Bowl or a Bear’s game next season as an “undocumented ticket holder” and see what the reaction is. (Hint — wear a helmet and plenty of pads.)

If our government doesn’t have the balls to deal with this, we’re going to see even those Hispanics who came in through proper channels tarred with the same brush as the uninvited “guest workers.” It won’t be fair and won’t be peaceful.

whattheheck - By pointing out that I was being satirical will only embarrass the other posters who didn’t pick up on it.  Shame on you. 

I know you often bristle at historical arguments, WTH but there are a few political moves by the US that really sped up this influx of immigrants. 

To start from the beginning: we did conquer half of Mexico.  And while this may seem like a long time ago, it wasn’t until the post-war that we developed the border states, and then really until the late 60’s and early 70’s, so the only people who lived out there were the only people who had ever lived out there - Mexicans (and the remaining Indians).

Until that time, there were a lot of traditional border crossings.  I lived for a spell in Terlingua, TX, which was a good example.  The Mexican children went to school in Terlingua, and many Texans did their shopping in Santa Elena, Mexico.  This was common, even right up to the 90’s. 

Another reason many immigrants are coming are political as well as economic.  To put it bluntly, Southern Mexican Indians are being kicked off their lands, and brutally.  That’s why most of your immigrants don’t look like Cheech Marin or Carlos Mencia anymore (they’re of northern Mexican ethnicity).  They look like Mixes, and Mixtecos, and Mayans, and are from Guerrero, Oaxaca, and Chiapas. 

Coincidentally, that’s where you can find a bevy of natural resources: timber, silver, petroleum, plutonium, etc.  Monsanto and General Paper have bought a lot of land down there.  Not to mention Plan Puebla-Panama, the land Isthmus that would connect Puebla, Mexico to Panama via train, immensely desired by multinational corporations.  It unfortunately runs right through Indian reservations (called ejidos). 

And even more coincidentally, that’s also where you can find paramilitary soldiers (they call themselves Paz y Justicia...isn’t that cute?) with American weaponry forcibly harrassing, and sometimes killing, the indigenous population. 

In short, the US government and US corporations are behind the diaspora.  So why should we be surprised that they would come here?  Maybe if we stopped stealing their land - again - they wouldn’t have to relocate. 

Perhaps the only difference between the land grabs of the 19th century and the land grabs of today is that we can’t obliterate the people.  But apparently we can arrest them.  So, back to my modest proposal…

“We need to just built the wall and keep out anyone from crossing the border.  Very simple....”

People can climb over or tunnel under a wall, can’t they?

There’s a reason people do the things they do. Making it harder to do whatever it is they’re going to do won’t solve the problem. A sick person will still be sick if their medicine got rid of the symptoms, but didn’t get rid of the disease.

There’s a reason illegal immigrants are coming into the country.  As kelliepowell said, the only way to stop illegal immigration is to fight global poverty. That’s the real problem here. I understand why illegal aliens would be a problem for the country. Deporting them is well and good, but it’s a temporary solution to a permanent problem. If we caught a hundred, a thousand, or a million illegal immigrants trying to cross the border in a year because of all the money we gave the border patrol, I wouldn’t say that’s progress or a solution. I’d say that’s the Government ignoring the real issue.

Rocco and the Land Grab:

If you don’t believe in national sovereignty, fine.  Just say so.

The US developed an economy that allows its working class to have an excellent standard of living because of Northern European values.  Not Hispanic, Latino or Catholic values.

Protestant v Catholic.

North v South.

Birth Control. (Does anyone in Latin America take the pill?)

How many medical breakthroughts, scientific discoveries have all the Latin American countries together created compared with North America or Europe?

Where is massive corruption the norm?  Ssh: Mexico?

PC is not the real world.

Columbia is not a nice place.  Or Cuba.  Hugo Chavez is not a Liberal.  Really.

The issue is the nature of our culture.  Ours (USA) is better than theirs. (Mexico et al). 

REALITY CHECK:

Values count.

Some are better than others.

Americans have the right to define who they are, and rely on successful, proven Founding Anglo-Saxon Principles.

Rocco, write to the Chinese Embassy and argue that China should have unrestricted borders.  Better still, go to China, or Russia, or Cuba, or Mexico, and hold up a sign that says, UNRESTRICTED IMMIGRATION.

See what ACLU or La RAZA can do for you then.

Jack Novak said this....

“There’s a reason illegal immigrants are coming into the country.  As kelliepowell said, the only way to stop illegal immigration is to fight global poverty. That’s the real problem here. I understand why illegal aliens would be a problem for the country.”

------------------------------------------------------------

It’s not our problem to solve Mexico’s poverty problem.  And the illegal’s are draining our social services.

We should have armed guards on towers on the boarder, and if they cross over into the USA.... then we shoot them dead.  Now that would stop them from crossing the boarder.

Problem Solved.....

knocko: It will be difficult to respond to your posts coherently, since you don’t seem to be addressing issues.  I take it you have a strong belief in things, and feel the need to post them. 

If you don’t believe in national sovereignty, fine.  Just say so.

This is confusing.  I have no idea what you mean.  I can only guess that this is in response to my above posts in which I made: 1) a satirical case for the imprisionment of immigrants, 2) a historical comparison of the Mexican-American War and corporate subversion of the Mexican Constitution.  If anything, I’m promoting the national sovereignty of our southern neighbors.  If they didn’t have to flee, they probably wouldn’t.

How many medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries have all the Latin American countries together created compared North America and Europe?

You are correct in stating that Mexico has not had as many medical breakthroughs as the US or western Europe.  This can be directly attributed to the lack of a scientific educational structure in the pre-Columbian Americas.  Their situation was never really allowed to grow, since we were quite fond of destroying any sort of democratic uprisings, and installing dictators.  See Guatemala, Chile, Venezuela, etc.

Things are changing (most of the activists I met in Mexico were in the sciences), but it takes time.  Asia of course is rapidly passing us, because our educational system is appalling. 

Mexican corruption is rampant.  This too has many factors, some of which is the fault of the US.  You can say what you like about Anglo-Saxon values, but our dominance has as much to do with Anglo-Saxon aggression.  I am ambivalent about the historical place of violence, but I hardly see it as a future aim for society.  You may differ...some people see no need to grow.

PC is not the real world.

This doesn’t make much sense, but I’m assuming you mean that political correctness does not truly reflect things as they are.  I agree.  If, however, you believe that objective historical analysis which is critical of US policy equals political correctness, then you are either confused or overprotective of your homeland. 

Colombia is not a nice place.  Or Cuba.

Ever been?

Values count.

Values do indeed matter.  Compassion, passive contemplation, logic, acceptance of biological and social diversity on a global scale, learning from history are virtues which I deeply value.  I do not care much for aggressive tactics, nor greed, nor narrow-minded self-interest, nor patriotism. 

And as for China, Russia, et al., you are right.  They are highly xenophobic countries.  Our national character is astounding - look at New York, or LA, or San Francisco, or Miami.  Vibrant, exciting places of multiple ethnicities.  How poor they would be without immigrants.

See what ACLU or La RAZA can do for you then.

Again, no idea what you mean.  I suppose this is derisive of human rights protection, specific to Chicanos?  You probably meant this as a joke, but I just don’t get it. 

I would appreciate it if you addressed my points in a similar manner, for the sake of intelligibilty.

tina1:  I thought you were a Christian?  I guess not.  Christians would be familiar with the story of the Good Samaritan.

PS - There’s no ‘a’ in the word ‘border.’ Lucky for you we don’t also shoot the barely literate.

Blessed are the merciful, tina1.

Rocco,

I don’t know where you get the impression that I, “...bristle at historical arguments,” — history is often a worthy consideration.

I have never lived in any of the southern border states and have only visited Arizona and Texas briefly. But, this is no longer just a border states problem. I live in Illinois where, like most states, budgets are in deepening deficits and the strain of thousands of illegals here is just beginning to draw criticism.

The numbers of people and the conditions are much different now, I expect, than the era you refer to.  Too many for us to absorb. Too many expenses to pick up. Too much concern for security since 9/11to convince most of us that this is not a major problem and getting worse.

My history includes a time when we could take our rifles to high school for rifle team practice. Picture anyone trying that today.

I have absolutely no sympathy for the corporations. Any land grabs going on must be with the complicity of the Mexican government. That will not cut any ice with disgruntled Americans when this situation starts to get a bit more heated. I’m afraid we could see a reaction that would be as violent as the 1960s only more widespread.

Our politicians are responsible for the size of the problem for not enforcing the laws, granting amnesty under Bush 1, and allowing employers to pay less than minimum wages. Our corporations have been exploiting these people on both sides of the border with the cooperation of both governments.

For a picture of the disgusting behavior of US corporations read, “Who will tell the People,” by Willliam Greider.  I was happy to hear Delphi (one of the worst) was going bankrupt. In 2004 their CEO made $6million, but refused to pay any cost for water and sewer facilities down there. He threatened to walk away from their campus-like facility and go to China if assessed for it.

Fighting global poverty is a noble and good idea, however, a very long term fix at best and unlikely to ever happen to any significant degree.

Immigration — Yes! 

llegal immigrants — No!

Rocco,

This has nothing to do about being Christian, it’s about protecting our country.

If you want to see what happens if a country just lets anyone in, then just look at France.  Unemployment rate has been over 10% for the past 10 yrs and now they have another riot that is out of control.  That is 2 riots in the past year. 

30% of all inmates in the USA are illegals… which cost us about $2.4 BILLON a year.

Tina,

I went to Goggle and entered — federal prisons illegal immigrants…

“In 1980, our federal and state prisons housed fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens. By the end of 1999, these same prisons housed over 68,000 criminal aliens.1 Today, criminal aliens account for over 29 percent of prisoners in Federal Bureau of Prisons facilities and a higher share of all federal prison inmates.2 These prisoners represent the fastest growing segment of the federal prison population. Over the past five years, an average of more than 72,000 aliens have been arrested annually on drug charges alone.”

...only one of many disturbing sites.

The law officers I watched testifying to a Senate committee talked a lot about the drug business — $1 crossing the border quickly doubles and tripples in street value as it moves north.

These crooks are visious.

whattheheck - Didn’t mean to offend you...I was only referring to our debates re Civil Rights Movement, where your answer was often “That was a long time ago.” Since I was making a similiar point, I was trying to head off a similiar response.  But what do I know…

You are correct that the Mexican government is complicit.  Are they ever.  Mexican politicians are either murderous thugs or corporatist weasels.  But you won’t see us preemptively rework their government a la Iraq anytime soon.  We make a lot of money off them. 

This is admittedly a difficult issue.  But here are some steps that I think would solve a lot of the problems we’re talking about:

1) Stop the rape of Mexico. 

2) Legalize drugs.

3) Raise minimum wage to a living wage.  Tough penalities for those who break the law by paying under the table. (why do you think business owners are the biggest proponents of hiring illegals?)

These are the core problems.  Better to address the cause rather than the symptoms.  Prediction: we won’t, and the situation will come to an ugly head.

And putting up walls is ridiculous.  So are we East Berlin now?

tina1: this has nothing to do with being a Christian? 

That’s a marvelous ability you have to shelve your central belief system and the preaching of your deity when it conflicts with your gut patriotic emotions. 

By the way, in response to your dismissal of brotherly love in favor of higher employment rates, here’s another Jesusism, from Mark 10:

Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

* * *

Basically, I just want you to admit that you aren’t a Christian, but a worshiper of false gods.  Please?

Here’s an interesting story which relates to this legislation. 

Have they ‘kicked the sleeping giant’?  Could this be a second civil rights movement?  500,000 is a lot of protesters…

Rocco,

No offense taken — just trying to clarify the value of history.
I happen to be reading a book of Christopher Hitchens essays right now “Love, Poverty, and War.” Just finished “Why Americans are not taught history.” If you don’t care to read it, you might just go to amazon.com and read the reviews. (I’ve saved a lot of money that way.) One of his own teaching methods is to have students read two texts with opposing views and discuss. Good to remember today with media and political extremism on the rise.

I agree on all of these points:
1) Stop the rape of Mexico. 
2) Legalize drugs.
3) Raise minimum wage to a living wage.  Tough penalties for those who break the law by paying under the table. (why do you think business owners are the biggest proponents of hiring illegals?)
Prediction: we won’t, and the situation will come to an ugly head.

I would say we are West rather than East Berlin in the sense they are trying to leave Mexico (and others). Still not an accurate metaphor since W. Berlin was welcoming them.

While I no longer consider myself a Christian (My history runs the gamut: Presbyterian — a more fundamentalist, evangelical brand — Congregationalist —agnostic) I feel as the biggest kid on the block I believe the US has an obligation to seek justice and aid those less well off.

1) We could do more for the Mexican people (due to our proximity and economic history) by applying trade pressures. It would be better for their people if conditions at home were fair than to need to emigrate.

The sheer numbers are too much for our economy to cope with and animosity is on the rise toward “foreigners” which could turn to scapegoating as Hitler did with Jews.

2) Legalize drugs, treat those willing/wanting to quit, free those imprisoned only for use/possession.
3) Living Wage is tricky — I remember a chart several years ago in which a living wage in Hawaii was $22/hr!  If not adjusted to locale migration to Mississippi and Alabama would rival our current border problem. Some sort of standard could be worked out, I am sure.

The favoritism toward employers with the illegals is an extension of our entire mismanaged globalization policy. “Take from the “Hads...to-hell-with-the-have-nots” and give it to the “Have-more-than-anyone-ever-needs.” We are experiencing a massive shift in capital that defeat and plunder methods could never match.

Question: When the middle class is reduced to a shadow, how does a country whose economy is two-thirds dependent on the consumer survive?  We’re about to find out the answer.

wth:  I agree with Hitchens on that.  Hitchens is someone I hold a lot of respect for, even though I disagree with most of his post-9/11 writings. 

At any rate, Americans have to be among the least educated in not only history but current events, at least in the industrial world.  And beyond.  I recall a moment when an eight-year old Mexican girl in Oaxaca was giving me a history lesson about globalization and its effects.  A humbling moment. 

Good points all.  And I’m not a Christian either.  But nothing gets under my skin as much as so-called Christians calling for violent tactics, or lacking sympathy in general.  It makes you wonder where they go to church. 

Re living wages: perhaps my ‘pie-in-the-sky’ suggestion, but we are at the other extreme.  Imagine working for $5.25 an hour!  That is modern-day slavery.  Think the CEOs would favor a maximum wage to counter-balance?

Question: When the middle class is reduced to a shadow, how does a country whose economy is two-thirds dependent on the consumer survive?  We’re about to find out the answer.

Not to mention the housing bubble.  Part of the immigrant situation has been based on the need for construction workers.  What happens when development slows down, and the workers are still here?

For those with NY Times subscription, check out this editorial by Paul Krugman.  Good balanced assessment of the problem, with no solution given…

rocco is concerned about the displaced illegals who won’t find jobs when the housing bubble bursts. (Or Rocco, when the US dollar collapses when the rest of the world realizes our IOU’s are as worthless as a Mexican peso since we print funny money to pay for our soaring social security, medicare and medicaid expenses).

Not to worry.  they can go to the workers’ paradises of Cuba and Venezuela.  After all, there’s all that “free” education and “freedom” (unless you’re gay, individualistic, a democratic socialist, religious or not a passive drone).

That way these “immigrants” won’t be discriminated against by the Evil White Empire.  Oh yeah, it’s the Evil White Empire that they crawl across the desert to reach, freely demonstrate in the streets of LA to stay in, and the Evil White Empire that spends billions on education and medicaid for these “immigrants” who don’t pay income taxes, often don’t secure driver licenses even when they can, and never met a can of Bud Lite that didn’t want to go 70 in a 20 mile speed zone.

But it’s OK, they would rather the simplicities of Fidel and Hugo’s paradisos than the materialistic, imperialisitic US of A.

knocko: are you carefully considering your points, are are you looking for excuses to attack straw-man points that no one has brought up?  Where to you go from our discussion to disdainfully jumping on Cuba and Venezuela? 

It seems to me you are knee-jerk in your defense of anything white, Anglo, or stereotypically American.  These are complex issues, regardless of how simple you’d like them to be. 

Yes, we do take care of them while they’re here (in the Krugman article I put up, he quotes a Swiss writer, who put it well: “We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.), but we also are the indirect cause of their fleeing Latin American states. 

Put down your anger, and objectively look at the facts.  That’s very difficult to do, I know.  You’d have to change your whole identity, wouldn’t you?  But growing is a painful process.  I believe in you, knocko.

WTH
You are so RIGHT on so much of your 0946, that I hardly dare to point out one major self-contradiction.

I agree “Stop the rape of Mexico”.  But then you say later on “apply trade pressure” to make them install a more just society ! 

Earlier on Knocko asked “Where is massive corruption the norm ?” And was pleased with himself to answer---- “Mexico ! “

Writing from france we have a lot of corruption, quite well hidden, but in the USA it is wide out in the open !  Surely, WTH, you do not need a brit in france to add up a few $100Bn of scams on the taxpayer in the US in the last 20 or so years ?

I was in the $business when the Savings and Loans scandal broke. How many £Bn was that ? I forget ! 

How in the name of Allah can you imagine that any US administration would do anything to encourage a more “just “ society somewhere else, when they are doing the opposite at home , because they are crooks ?

KNOCKO
When you say “the US working class has an excellent standard of living”, WTH will bring you up to date on his city, I hope.

TINA1
Unemployment in france is officially at 10% .
When I did first year economics, lesson 1 was “There are Lies, damned Lies, and Statistics.” In other words it’s complicated stuff. Each country collects them in different ways, has different definitions and cultures.
UK, US officially at 5%.
I’d put the real figure for france at 13% and you two at 11%.
Not sure if the 2.3million americans in prison are counted in or out when they work, or do not ?

Of course last year’s car-burning ( not riots) had something to do with immigration. But most of those guys’ parents and grandparents were not “let in “, they were recruited !

This year there are massive demonstrations against the government, not riots. Native-born french people, and some immigrants like me, mostly white, are expressing our disagreement with a government that is trying to do to France what your Administration is doing to you .

It is called exploitation, which may be spelled globalisation.

My Left Knee is beginning to twitch. Amid the Brouhaha over immigration, two salient facts are being buried under a mountain of politically correct hype, and conservative fear mongering.

* Illegal immigrants take only very low wage jobs out of the economy. The only ones being hurt are the immigrants who cannot stand up for themselves and get better wages for fear of being deported.

* Immigrants have always taken low wage jobs. If they had the education and opportunities in their home country, they wouldn’t by and large leave. But, once here, they do have opportunities unthinkable in their home country, to give their children and their children’s children a future free of moribound tradition and repression. Thomas Jefferson once opined that by educating everyone, and not just the elites, America’s potential of talent in business, in science, in government, would overwhelm the world.

In a globalized economy, why are we allowing our greatest competitive advantage to be shortchanged?

I say, if they want to contribute to our economy, let them in. Maybe with all that legitimate cheap labor, we can start to re-import some of the manufacturing base we have lost over the past couple decades....

Rocco,

“You are so RIGHT on so much of your 0946, that I hardly dare to point out one major self-contradiction.
I agree “Stop the rape of Mexico”.  But then you say later on “apply trade pressure” to make them install a more just society !”
-----------------------------------------

What’s 0946?

“Stop the rape of Mexico,” to me means stop the exploitation of Mexicans in the homeland by US corporations.

Pressuring them to create a more just society seems like a good way to keep them there and reduce the problem of illegals. Why do you think they are coming up here, to ski?

Do you have a problem with either of those?  Corruption knows no borders — it is and always has been a global trait.
----------------------------------------
Jay,

“* Illegal immigrants take only very low wage jobs out of the economy.”

I wish it were so. We see an Hispanic doing a job — how do we know if he is legitimate or not?  All the way up here in Illinois they are working for less at a lot of jobs. One specific example I know of is the large number of family landscaping businesses. Try continuing to pay benefits plus a decent wage and compete with them. A local hospital fired their entire maintenance and grounds staff to out source to them.

With 2/3 of our economy dependent on consumers, we are in deep trouble — just wait and see.

Unrestricted entry for decades and amnesty of the illegals here under Bush the First, and now wanting to legitimize them as “guest workers” by Bush II, is advertising to the whole world, “Y’all come on in!”

Read up on the problems the Swedes have after a long-time similar policy. Goggle on Malmö, Sweden (my wife’s cousin is a cop there) or go to the Weekly Standard article below.

A Swedish Dilemma
From the February 28, 2005 issue: Immigration and the welfare state.
by Christopher Caldwell
02/28/2005, Volume 010, Issue 22
Malmö, Sweden

whattheheck: that wasn’t me, it was frog.  I don’t know what 0946 means either.

But, since you got me posting, I’ll add 2 more cents.  I really think this issue is so complex than no one has a good grasp of it. 

For me, “Stop the rape of Mexico” means stop supporting the paramilitary’s political harrassment of the people, the corporate takeover of natural resources, and the confiscation of Indian reservations (ejidos).  Frog’s point I believe has something to do with the flooding of the Mex. economy with GMO corn, destroying the self-sufficient way of life for the poor, etc.

Believe it or not, I think a lot of the conservative blogs on this issue (that aren’t blinded by fear and racism) are making more sense than some progressive sites.  I do think that immigration is a safety valve for Mexico’s corrupt government.  If the people couldn’t escape, they may revolt more quickly.  Our government (read our corporations) are only too willing to take advantage. 

Jay Cline wrote:

In a globalized economy, why are we allowing our greatest competitive advantage to be shortchanged?

I say, if they want to contribute to our economy, let them in. Maybe with all that legitimate cheap labor, we can start to re-import some of the manufacturing base we have lost over the past couple decades....

A valid counter-point.  I must admit, I have many opinions on this.  But not among them is arresting the illegals as felons.  What a nightmare that would be…

Many people see illegal immigration as a form of labor migration and a consequent “taking of US jobs from Americans.” While modern immigration is certainly a form of labor migration the question as to whether or not “American jobs” are being taken is debatable. Since there is a two tier labor market in the US, as there is in any place that has significant illegal labor immigration, the jobs being “taken” are actually intended for those who are migrating to them since no other laborers are willing to do them.  Further, such critics fail to address the fact that the US is actually taking Mexican jobs through such means as NAFTA, the dumping of subsidized grains on the Mexican market displacing Mexican small farmers, US direct foreign investment that displaces local businesses and jobs, US sponsership of IMF Stabalization Adjustment Programs that induces recessions in order to curb inflation and insure the Mexican Government’s foreign debt service, and, finally, financial and currency speculation which devalues the Peso and causes capital flight.  All these things contribute to US corporate wealth while creating the need for impoverished Mexicans to cope with the consequent poverty by migrating.  The rich benefit from both; the liberalization of the Mexican economy and the migration of cheap labor north to the US.  If there is a culprit in all this it is globalization!

wth,

I do NOT support “guest worker” programs.

I lived in Germany for several years and the Turks, many who have spent quite some time working in Germany, are 1) second-class citizens, 2) disinterested in Germany internal affairs, 3) financially spend little in Germany and send most back to Turkey, and 4) are completely unintegrated with the Germany society at large.

In other words, they fail to meet my first requirement of “contributing” to the economy in which they work. Establishing “Mexican enclaves” (aka Polish ghettos) is not my idea of a rational solution.

But, if they wish to partake of the American dream, well, I have always defined American as a state of mind. And living for the American dream is very much part of it.

Also,

One specific example I know of is the large number of family landscaping businesses. Try continuing to pay benefits plus a decent wage and compete with them. A local hospital fired their entire maintenance and grounds staff to out source to them.

I didn’t realize that maintenance and grounds staff was a high tech, high pay occupation.

Seems to me that any argument that would use that as an example of high-paying jobs falls victim to the fallacy that they should be high paying jobs.

Why do you think America lost so much of its manufacturing base? Undrepriced cheap labor overseas, or overpriced domestic labor?

I still get a kick out of the rationale of one automotive striker,
“I need a third snowmobile for my kids”

Yeah, right.

cabdriverinchicago, you wrote:

Since there is a two tier labor market in the US, as there is in any place that has significant illegal labor immigration, the jobs being “taken” are actually intended for those who are migrating to them since no other laborers are willing to do them.

Here’s a clip from Paul Krugman’s article in yesterday’s NY Times:

The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much thhat job pays - and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants.

Maybe that’s what you meant, but I agree with Krugman that Americans are not beneath certain jobs, but can’t live on the wages they pay.  My uncle was a carpenter, my neighbor was a landscaper, and all the high school kids dug ditches once they were of age.  I never see that anymore.

We need to regulate pay, and we need to raise minimum wage substantially.  If a corporation can’t hack it, that corporation must adapt or die.  It’s the capitalist way.

Jay Cline,

you wrote:

Why do you think America lost so much of its manufacturing base? Undrepriced cheap labor overseas, or overpriced domestic labor?

True.  Though our government could have interpreted our workers’ rights laws to extend to US corporations regardless of the countries to which they relocate.  That’s a policy issue as much as an economic one.

I’m not a knee-jerk anti-globalist, but I think it could have been adapted for the benefit of all, and not just as a cost-cutting bonanza.  We’re seeing the effects of those decisions now. 

Corporations, to the extent at which they should be allowed to exist, should be free to make profit any way possible, so long as it’s legal.  However we the people should decide what the laws should be - how far they can go, and what kind of communities we want to have. 

Low-skilled work should be low-paying work, and I agree that the market should at some level determine worth.  But allowing companies to subvert laws in order to pay people less seems, well, unAmerican.

On another blog, where I have argued the same thoughts, the responses to it have led me to this conclusion, one that seems so obviously clear that I fear to reveal my thoughtlessness towards it now. But it is direct response to my somewhat flippant statement about bringing home the domestic manufacturing base.

And by the way…. You’ll never re-import the manufacturing that’s in Mexico. We can’t touch $1.75/an hour with government subsidized medical care down there.

to which I responded:

If we give the immigrants the opportunity to make a fair wage, the $1.75 hour jobs in Mexico will lose some of their their luster, forcing your American cum Mexican companies to raise their base rate as they compete in the Mexican-American border labor market, forcing American domestic employers to again raise the wages of Mexican immigrant jobs, etc etc etc, until a more equitable balance is reached.

I dare say, and unapologically predict, that when that balance is reached, you will find that a domestic manufacturing labor market will be much more appealing...

In short, the causes and effects of such low pay to “illegal” immigrants explains many, if not all, the current issues.....

Jay Cline,

You make a good point, economically speaking, and I absolutely agree. 

However, as I wrote earlier, isn’t this allowing the Mexican government to shirk responsibility to its own citizenry (this is also a conclusion I’ve arrived upon through debate on other sites)?  Doesn’t this overlook, or perhaps oversimplify, human rights violations? 

My experiences in Southern Mexico, and subsequent interest in following its politics, is one of racial oppression.  The indigenous aren’t just fleeing because of economics.  In many cases, they’ve been chased off their lands.

Can the market solve everything?  Indeed, the market is metastasizing the problem, due to corporate interest in Mexico’s natural resources.  Isn’t corporate regulation called for?  Or international condemnation (with US cooperation) of human rights violations? 

Rich Mexicans can and will keep power at all costs, particularly with US support.  If we threatened that support, Mexico would snap-to.  No question.

Rich Americans can and will keep power at all costs.

No way will they threaten their Mexican partners for other than an ulterior motive.

frog,

Another good point.  So, I guess it would be up to citizens of a republic to work to change that, yes?  I like to think of these forums as the kindling of democracy...but without the spark of action or the oxygen of participation, well, to quote Ben Kenobi, “the Emperor has already won.”

WTH 28th 0351
I don’t have a ‘problem’ with what you wrote about Mexico; I agree with the analyses here on the rape of Mexico. Moving here to ski, ?
My ‘problem’ was that no way is the US going to pressure Mexico to economic reforms to benefit the vast majority of its people.
.
The earlier delocalisation of US factories to Mexico was followed by further movement as these jobs then moved on to China, leaving unemployment and increased poverty behind. Those fleeing to the US are refugees from a failing society to another less far down that road.
(Same here in Europe, corrupt rulers sustained by our governments and multinationals, and the IMF, have been and ARE ruining their countries, so thousands die every year crossing the sahara and the mediterranean.)

The obvious answer IS to make life back home worthwhile, but how?

ROCCO
I completely agree that the forums are leading somewhere, IF they push us to action !
Instead of each of us being left with our own reflections and experience, the friction of debate helps us to go further. Over the years I have read hundreds of articles recommended by other participants.

Sometimes I have been forced to radically change my opinion, when an author demonstrates, with proof, that what I had been fed by the mainstream media and my politicians was a pack of lies.

This is painful but galvanising.

Must soon go and prepare my low-tech tools to do my low-skilled landscaping and maintenance. Thank allah for the minimum wage!

My only unpleasant employer, a well-off german with a very large holiday home here in normandy, complained at my rates, because at home he pays his Pole 8euros on the black !

It did not take me long to point out that I had as much right as him to contribute to a pension, and that if I had an uninsured accident, chainsaw or heart attack, on his property, he would be in very deep shit !

Rocco,

Not sure what this you are referring to when you said,

You make a good point, economically speaking, and I absolutely agree.

However, as I wrote earlier, isn’t this allowing the Mexican government to shirk responsibility to its own citizenry

The economic effect of government policy on illegal immigrant wages? Making immigrants felons? Abolishing the laws that make immigrants illegal and welcome them into our society as full participatory citizens?

Also, going back to some of your earlier comments, specifically your 3 Point Solution,

1) Stop the rape of Mexico,

Sure, to the extent of regulating American corporate behavior overseas in line with what is allowed and not allowed in American society (though the transnational nature of many businesses needs to be addressed first), and to the extent of recognizing Mexican sovereignty over their own country, which is in fact a democracy.

2) Legalize drugs.

Why? All that would do is turn cutthroat smugglers into legitimate businessmen. The only governmental regulation I would favor in the illicit drug import business is longer jail time. And I intrinsically oppose decriminalizing drug use. But that is a separate debate.

3) Raise minimum wage to a “living wage”.

Again, a separate debate. If one accepts my economic logic on immigrant wages vis a vis the lack of bargaining power between immigrants and businesses, we need to legitimize their economic activity first so their wage can be raised to the minimum wage level. From there, let’s see if collective bargaining can resolve any further issues.

Jay Cline,

The this I was referring, admittedly lazily, was the entirety of the Mexican immigration debate: that is, the fact that we are encouraging through policy that more Mexicans flee their lands for safety and prosperity.  Even having debated this issue, and read as much as I can on it, I’m still torn and confused.

I do stand by my 3 points as far as getting clear results. 

1) We seem to more or less agree, but I’m inferring from your last statement that ‘If Mexico lets us, it’s not our fault’, which could be my misread.  Mexico may be a republic, but it is woefully corrupt and repressive.  To suggest that Mexico’s people should rise up and take control of their government is sound.  To assume that it is as facile as here is fallacious. 

2) Indeed a separate argument.  But it is wrong to conclude that druglords would become legitimate businessmen, just as Al Capone didn’t become Anheuser-Busch after prohibition. 

Illegal trade is illegal, period.  But the controlled sale of drugs - similar in nature to the sale of pharmeceuticals - would be safe, and would solve many problems, not the least of which would be the current skirmishes between corrupt Mexican military and Border Patrol. 

Besides, as a free-marketer, why not?  Because you don’t like them?  That doesn’t sound very free to me.  Besides, look at Amsterdam.  None of the Dutch I knew smoked weed...none of them wanted to mingle with the Americans!!!

3) Yes, and another separate issue.  But not solely for the Mexican workers do we need to raise the wage.  It’s an abomination.

This entire issue turns on NAFTA and globalization. Since the implementation of NAFTA by Mexico in 1994, millions of hectres of Mexican farmland has been lost and hundreds of thousands of farmers producing corn and basic grains have been forced off the land.  Though the Mexican government promised that the agricultural sector would become more efficient, produce cheaper food, and receive more government aid to support technological improvements for those remaining on the land, none of the promised reforms occured.  Between 1994 and 2000, government aid to small farmers dropped from $2 billion to $500 million.  The market has been taken over by US subsidized grains and prices have gone up in urban markets.  More than 75% of Mexico’s 25 million farmers live in abject poverty frequently on about $1/day.  Between 1990 and 2000 Mexican migration to the US increased by over 80% accelerating after the passage of NAFTA.

The privatization of the Mexican banking system, also mandated by NAFTA, killed much of the labor intensive small business sector.  After Vincente-Fox sold off about 85% of the local banks to the private sector many of those who purchased them recieved lavish subsidies to the tune of $60 billion from the Mexican government to compensate for the Peso crisis of the mid-1990s.  Many local Mexican bankers turned around and sold off their banking operations to foreign-often US-banking multinationals for up to four times what they paid to the Mexican government.  By the late 1990s Mexican bank lending to local businesses dropped from 10% of total lending to well under one percent.  Over the period of the late 1990s tens of thousands of small Mexican business filed for bankruptcy.

Even the much vaunted Maquiladore sector failed to keep labor migration from occuring.  After a spurt of growth in the 1990s, over 200,000 maquiladore jobs left for China by 2000. 

The disasterous effects on Mexico of the NAFTA agreement were predictable. The US subsidizes its farmers much more than does the Mexican government. Still this is not about “free trade” or international trade in general but the consolidation of international investment at the expense of both US and Mexican workers and farmers all of whom have lost land and jobs.  Much of the trade between Mexico and the US is between large corporations and their subsidiaries. So much of the land taken over in Mexico is by agribusiness corporations or rich farmers having long term contracts with US corporations that intensively raise GE crops and sell them back to big US food processors at the expense of US farmers.  Thus, Globalization is not about freeing up markets for better goods at lower prices but consolidating the worlds production in a few hands, reaping big profits, and externalizing the costs in unemployment, high costs to consumers, and poor quality goods.  One of the predictable results in the third world is displacement and consequent labor migration to places there are jobs and relatively better incomes

Rocco,

If you are guilty of a “misread”, it is only in intensity. My thoughts on the domestic Mexican troubles is not so much If Mexico lets us, it’s not our fault as it is that Mexico is a legitimate sovereign county and, short of invasion, we do not have a great deal of direct control over the situation. And we shouldn’t, because it isn’t our country and Mexico is a bona fide democracy, albiet as imperfect as most.

On a separate note, and not meaning to start a separate debate, I am indeed a free-marketer, but most definitely NOT a libertarian. Ergo, it is not inevitable that I should support decriminalization of currently illicit drugs.

CABBY
Sometimes I wonder if anyone else reads your posts, and mine, because they carry on regardless.

1Stop the Rape of Mexico , ROCCO !  For the third time , those in power in the US are raping the US, so how can you EVER imagine they are going to stop raping elsewhere ?  They do not give a monkey’s for human rights, unless it suits them as a public relations excuse for going to war somewhere.

Globalisation with a small ‘g’ is a fact. My 80yr old ma now mails me from NZ.  My $25 Chinese drill goes through granite like the $500 predecessor did.

Globalisation (big G) is about driving down the quality of life for most people in both the rich and poor nations, so that a VERY small minority will get incredibly rich.

So what are we going to do about them ?

Well, offhand, I’d say that we’ll continue to ignore your posts (and cabbie’s, too), since the two of you seem to know what you’re talking about while the rest of us would rather grind away at our own respective ideological axes.  No pun intended.  For example, the idea that undocumented workers are an unmiitgated social evil is nonsense, since most of them are employed by people who would otherwise be out of business without them: small to medium farmers who would otherwise be unable to compete with agribusiness, landscapers laid off from their auto plants, local restaurants competing against the national fast food chains, small manufacturers forced to cut quality and costs to supply Wal-Mart with the products they require at the prices they demand, et cetera., ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

By the way, all you Italian conservatives might be surprised to discover that the word wop is an acronym coined around the turn of the last century.  It represents the phrase “without papers”.

The point is, this country was built on the unpaid or underpaid labor of undocumented immigrants or, as the case may be, emigrants.

Jay Cline,

Re US-Mexico relations, e can do a lot short of invasion.  Like sanctions, or ending the supply of arms that they are using to advance low-intensity warfare in southern Mexico. 

Here’s where I agree with frog and cabbie: we haven’t engaged in such practices, because we’re benefiting from it.  In fact we’re encouraging it.  A memo was made public in the mid-90’s from Chase Bank, effectively telling Mexico to eliminate the Zapatista uprising. 

I’m not holding my breath for it, but I think it would be sound policy which would work.  Mexico is a sovereign nation - but in today’s world, they are a sophisticated form of a satellite nation.  We do have more of a responsibility for Mexican citizens than, say, Chinese citizens.

major major:

All Italians learn what wop means by the age of 7.  It’s a proven fact.  My family, however, had papers, so I can act indignant when that term is applied to me.

A few points ;
1) Since people here illegally keep a low profile, what dependable data is there on their actual numbers? If none, then we really don’t know the percentage of foereign born in this country..A century ago. We had no quotas and anyone who could get here could stay. We needed their labor. The situation today is almost the opposite. 
2) The minimum wage remains low precisely because of the surplus of unskilled, undocumented workers. There is no need to raise the minimum wage when it’s so easy to find cheap undocumented labor. 
3) Senator Clinton’s positioning aside, it is still the case that a law that punishes immigrants, and those that provide humanitarian assistance, but exempts people who hire them, is unjust. In fact the lion’s share of enforcement should focus on the employers. Building trades, restaurant chains, janitorial companies, even Wal-Mart, all exploit those here illegally, to the detriment of our own citizens.
4) The union movement here has been practically gutted by the same political forces that now promote amnesty (again) and guest worker programs. Most of their recent gains have come from those here illegally. Those workers who can be unionized will soon find themselves competing with the next wave of illegal immigrants for low wage jobs.

The NAFTA record is clear. Mexico experienced a 9% decline in per capital income growth by the late 1990s over the 1981 peak growth year just before the first major debt crisis of 1982.  A 28% decline in the rate of per capita new investment also occured in the 1990s over the earlier recorded peak growth period of the pre-1982 debt crisis period.

One impetus for the agreement was the incredible amount of foreign direct investment (FDI) that began pouring into Mexico up until the NAFTA treaty. Over $91 billion of Foreign Direct Investment poured into Mexico over the five years just before the treaty was signed. Mexico was one of the top five countries to collectively receive most of the nearly $400 billion in FDI that flowed to the third world from the late 1980s to the early 1990s. What was refered to in the business press as the “Mexican Meltdown” was a sudden rise in US interest rates that drew vast sums of dollars out of Mexico causing the Peso to collapse. Though a $50 billion bailout was arranged by The Clinton Administration, much damage was done to the Mexican economy from which it has never recovered and which was exacerbated by the extremely disadvantages terms of the bailout.

The almost total foreign takeover of the Mexican banking system, which deprived labor intensive local businesses of domestic bank loans that before NAFTA accounted for over 10% of the Mexican GDP, caused a wave of bankruptcies due to the sudden disappearence of local credit.  Millions of farmers lost their land and migrated to the cities or to the US when US subsidized grains were dumped on the Mexican market. The devastating impact on the Mexican economy was not compensated for by increased exports to the US which were actually greater in dollar amounts before NAFTA.  The Mexican export sector became so foreign dominated that very little of the value added of this sector accrued to local business. Most went to US Transnational Corporations. In fact, it is estimated that about 70% of US/Mexican trade is between transnational corporations or TNCs and their wholly owned subsidiaries. This has not helped stem the tide of immigration to the US and has even aggravated it. 

Globalization, and in particular the global inequality created by terms of trade and investment established and perpetuated by agreements like NAFTA, is the culprit for the unceasing Mexican immigration to the US seen today. Failing to address this issue will ensure that the immigration problem will never be adequately resolved!

Unless, of course, we simply cease calling a problem and welcome Mexican immigrants as, well, immigrants.

Jay Cline,

There is no question that we should have a generous immigration policy.  Most of us decend from immigrants.  But it is a policy that needs to be controlled. Uncontrolled immigration can strain any society beyond its capacity to cope. Problems arise that are difficult to solve.  I have always believed that the overall economic growth that immigrants create through their low wage labor and savings offsets their demand for services. In fact, such services as healthcare and education consists of an efficiently provided social wage which supports this low wage labor force that enriches mostly big business (some would say at the expense of poorer tax payers in our currently regressive system of taxation).  This only further bloats financial markets and other draws for excess wealth.

Still, it is necessary regulate the immigration process.  Until we have a comprehensive program for this effort, reversing the negative effects of NAFTA is important.  It is ill understood that this is the source of so much of the increase in the rate of immigration over the past decade.  Better economic times like the 1960s and 1970s saw far lower immigration.  Immigration is created by economic instability.  Unregulated it can create instability in turn.  I support open borders. I also support regulation and control of the process and not anarchy.

I can identify with the technique described in this article, however, with quite a different opinion regarding illegal immigrants.  The analogy of the Nazi’s graduated elimination technique fits my experience as well as many of my friends and business associates.  The illegals are only one part of that process.

“First they came for the Communists,”

I can think of a few other analogies and examples which also apply:

• A wolf in sheep’s clothing
• Burning the candle at both ends
• The ladder to success
— and (a slight modification)
• The land of opportunity
• Connecting the dots
• No man is an island

(Far) Easterners are known for seeing the linkages between nearly all aspects of life. Our western literalism often “Can’t see the forest for the trees.”

The cheap, illegal immigrant labor and US companies’ foreign factories are two prongs of the same globalization phenomenon.  If globalization hasn’t touched you or someone close to you negatively so far, don’t get too comfortable. Today, more than ever, things have an unavoidable interconnectivity.

A bit of personal immigrant history:  My paternal grandfather came to America (legally) a little more than a century ago. Although a farmer in Sweden, unable to afford land here, he became a coal miner in central here.

Our story follows the familiar pattern of each succeeding generation rising a bit higher on the economic ladder.  This trend began reversing with my generation and my sons’.  As a nation we are spiraling downward at an ever increasing rate. The optimistic government stats are a huge “numbers racket” designed to lull us into complacency.

We should not separate the multiple facets of globalization — cheaper labor, technological advances, racial/national considerations — there may be others.

In my field (graphics)…
• First they came for the typesetters — the bosses’ secretaries could set type.
• Next were photographers — stock photos at fraction of the cost
• Illustrators — stock art (300 pieces on a CD for what I charge for some original art)
• Now it is the printing companies losing out to JIT printing from a computer.
These were all jobs which paid well. It may not have been wise or even possible to avoid the switch to digital, but the big difference between the tech revolution as compared to the switch from agriculture to industry is the speed and locale.  Rather than a couple of generations domestically, it has been a couple of decades globally.

I now know more than 50 individuals who have lost their businesses, their jobs, their benefits in a broad range of jobs — some more than once. All between the ages of 35 and 60.

(more)

Jay wrote, “I didn’t realize that maintenance and grounds staff was a high tech, high pay occupation.”

An important difference was the benefits in addition to the wages which meant taxpayers were not as likely to be called on to care for them in the future. These were decent lower middle class jobs — the backbone of our tax support.

Jay also:
“Why do you think America lost so much of its manufacturing base? Underpriced cheap labor overseas, or overpriced domestic labor?” Both.  Manufacturers (like the autos) gave in to ridiculous union demands over a long period rather than fight. 
• A wolf in sheep’s clothing — Conversion from manufacturing to high tech

• Burning the candle at both ends — Our white collar jobs to India or to legal immigrant visa holders, Our blue collar jobs to legal and illegal immigrants willing to work for lower pay and/or no benefits

• The ladder to success — The bottom rung shifting from less educated, less skilled citizens to illegals, the more skilled going to other countries with fewer employer restrictions

• Connecting the dots — Terrorist threats, ports management, border security, and drug/people smuggling, law enforcement, job quality, consumer spending, US economy, benefits, taxes

• No man is an island — US consumers pinched, domestic economy shrinks, charitable giving down, scapegoating, civil unrest and violence, political concessions, welfare/taxes increase, protectionism, global economy hurt, US foreign/emergency aid lessens, on and on

— and (a slight modification)
• The land of opportunists — Cheap labor, job cuts, management bonuses, tax breaks, stock options, book deals (How I got to be a wealthy SOB by working the system — ie: Jack Welch)

The best way to get rid of millions of illegal immigrants already here is to arrest the people who are exploiting them.  No job — no reason to stay — no reason for more to come.

As for exporting our jobs I don’t have a clue (maybe no hope is more accurate). too many influential people are benefiting and the same as with the Nazis, by affecting only relatively small numbers at a time there has been little resistance. Some were bought off into early retirement, some took it to keep their health care — GM is currently trying cash which is always pretty effective.

Hola, amigos;

I’ve been lurking in on this conversation when the occasion permits, and I must say I’m impressed by the reasonableness displayed.  Bang up job of facilitating the dialog, rocco.  I really like your three point plan.  A nice anchor to speculative ideation.

One thing I’ve only seen peripherally addressed in respect to what effect US policy and politicking has on Mexico (and all of Latin America) is what the current hullabaloo in Congress will have in the upcoming Mexican elections.  It seems, barring unforeseeable events, Obrador is headed to victory in the presidential race, but it remains uncertain how much that will translate into increased PRI representation in the legislature.  Though I don’t see the Senate actually passing the house bill, if the Republican leadership continues to press it at the expense of the committee bill, there is a likelihood of considerable backlash among the Mexican electorate.  Though Obrador has been careful to position himself as a centrist this could well cause his prospective government to lean even more leftward.  Not a happy prospect for US corporate interests, maybe, but any improvement in the lives of Mexican workers and small farmers is bound to relieve the pressure on cross-border migration.  I’m also wondering how an Obrador goverment’s policies might change toward the Zapatistas.

As far as domestic politics goes, anything that contributes to the on-going melt-down of the Republican Party can only be good for ordinary Americans.  Not that I feel much confidence in the Democratic leadership, but a smidgin of influence on the part of the Progressive Caucus would be a breath of fresh air.  Maybe the Capitol Police will even begin treating Cynthia McKinney with due respect. 

I can’t say I’m at all surprized by the massive demonstrations in the last week.  I work summers in a food processing plant that is ~90% Latino and something I have noticed is an increasing political awareness, especially among the Mexicanos.  These are folks some of whom I’ve worked shoulder to shoulder with for 30 years.  Most came here as illegals, most are now citizens, most with dual citizenship.  For years trying to engage any of them in politics would only elicit a cynical shrug of the shoulders.  Union participation has long been a matter dominated by patronage and nepotism.  Now the lunch table is a scene of vibrant discussion about real issues with opinions all over the place, with the possible exception that everyone despises Bush. 

This is an important distinction I’d like to make against WTH’s example of his Swedish grandfather.  When he came here from across the ocean, it was a one-way ticket.  He was here to stay.  A true immigrant.  For Mexicans it has for generations been more a matter of a migratory pattern.  For most it is no more than a two day drive to their ancestral homes.  Many now own homes and businesses here and in Mexico, too.  The idea of further restriction on a border that is already an interminable bottle-neck is almost too awful to imagine.

Gotta love the new edit button.  Kudos!.

Hi LB,

re: “...WTH’s example of his Swedish grandfather.  When he came here from across the ocean, it was a one-way ticket.  He was here to stay.  A true immigrant.  For Mexicans it has for generations been more a matter of a migratory pattern.  For most it is no more than a two day drive to their ancestral homes.  Many now own homes and businesses here and in Mexico, too.”

I would prefer “true immigrants” within the legal guidelines, but I would find it acceptable if they were being paid at least our minimum wage and American citizens still did not want the work.  As it is now I still see it a policy of exploitation favoring the employers. We can/should pay a floating market price for the products and services they are providing.

WTH,

Dual citizenship is within the legal guidelines.  These are people who have worked hard and struggled much to up-lift themselves. 

I totally agree about minimumum wage plus, but as long as the undocumented remain in the shadows of the law, many are prone to be exploited in sweat-shops and under-the-table day labor.  As is happening in the wake of Katrina, often being stiffed of their wages, at that.  On the other hand, many find decent, if low-paying, jobs in hotels, restaurants, dairies and the like, can return to Mexico with the certainty of a job, get documentation and return legally.  It is a complex, multi-dimensional situation, not easily reduced to simple stereotypical assumptions. 

My co-workers often tell me to come down with them to Mexico in the off-season where the cost of living is a fraction of what it is in California.  They’ll put me up in their homes, sponsor me for citizenship, even match me up with a Mexican wife.  My work partner wants me to join him in his side-line of buying used pick-up trucks in the States and selling them for a good profit in Guadalajara.  It is sorely tempting.

If US citizens could compete with Mexican workers they might take those jobs.

When I was younger, I spent a year following the crops, with a buddy who grew up on a peach ranch.  In this one orchard, there were the two of us and a Mexican family working.  A man and his wife, a teen-age son, a pre-adolescent daughter and uno nino of about five. 

I was, at my best, able to fill a bin and a half a day, and my friend, who’d been doing this all his life, two plus, maybe three.  That was working practically daylight to daylight.

The family, with the three eldest on ladders, the daughter taking their full buckets and handing them empty ones, and the baby picking up falls from under the trees would fill two sets (eight bins) or more and quit for the day before the sun got hot, having taken a mid-morning lunch break.  We’d gobble down sandwiches while still in the trees.

With minimum wage at the time about $60/wk take-home, we were getting paid piece-work @ $5/bin.  You can do the math.

The differences when we were picking apples in Oregon were even more disparate, as that requires not just speed but delicacy when handling the fruit.

I don’t want to even talk about the agony of picking citrus.

To be fair, there were still, at the time, a few Okie families doing the same kind of work.

luminous beauty: Welcome. 

Re Obrador: interesting indeed.  My irrational take: if he’s not assassinated, they’re not worried about him.

It is scandalous how little day laborers are compensated, which your story illustrates.  And yet the average wage in Mexico is less than $2 a hour (and the cost of living in many parts was still about 80% of ours when I was there 3 years ago). 

I am most intrigued by this story for its larger theme of our schizophrenic continent.  It illustrates so well the architectural flaws in the current globalist structure. 

I believe that people casually assume that it’s always been like this.  It hasn’t.  The rise in corporate wealth - i.e. the proportion of wealth held by corporations - has skyrocketed in the last 20 years.  We just this year broke a new record of corporate profit.  And yet Darfur, and yet Mexico.

I’m of the opinion that siamese twins like us share the heart.  If there’s a revolution in Mexico, I’m curious to see if what our reaction will be…

whattheheck:

You wrote:

I would prefer true immigrants within the legal guidelines, but I would find it acceptable if they were being paid at least our minimum wage and American citizens still did not want the work.

I agree with your second point; as for the first, I would agree with LB in that these immigrants are historically unique, and differ from Swedish, or any other European immigrant.  I wrote about this in more detail above somewhere on this page.  And while I have been accused of being a non-believer of national sovereignty, I do believe the borders should be viewed differently than are currently perceived. 

Is it a coincidence that our northern border and our relationship with Canada should be so different; does it not tell of some sort of historic prejudice due to similarity of cultures?  And from that a despotic sort of disdain for our browner, more “hot-blooded” southern neighbor?

If history is a study from which something is to be learned, I think the transparency of the current US-Mexican relationship is essential for change.  A strong supporter of the ‘push-down/pop-up’ theory, I believe wall-building and isolationism would bring a total disaster.

LB,

Dual citizenship — Fine by me.

“These are people who have worked hard and struggled much to up-lift themselves.”

I have found those who I’ve met to be so.

“ ...many find decent, if low-paying, jobs in hotels, restaurants, dairies and the like, can return to Mexico with the certainty of a job, get documentation and return legally.”

This sounds better to me than anything thus far.

The problem is, as usual, in the political games. I am totally against the “amnesty” cop-out by any name. As we can plainly see (If Bush One had “the vision thing,” he could have too.) it is an open invitation to more law breaking by both sides.

Let employers go to Mexico, recruit, hire and then let in enough to fill any jobs not filled by other current citizens.  But pay them minimum wage. Make some provision for “special guest patient status” for medical care. Assess employers for Workman’s Comp, etc. Tax their earnings and deduct for Social Security. Let the market adjust price of peaches to reflect the cost.

Let’s have a genuine free market — as opposed to the business/CEO advantaged, “Screw the worker whether domestic or foreign,” policies globalization has adopted to date. What can be more Ugly American than the plundering of humanity that has been going on since NAFTA and the other business favoring deals?

WTH:

I’m not clear what you mean by ‘amnesty cop-out’.  There is nothing in any of the proposals I’ve read that comes close to amnesty.  They all require punitive fines and/or restrictive hoops to jump through in order to attain legal status.  You can review them for yourself

HERE.

As far as minimum wage it would be nice to see piece-work abolished in the farm labor and apparel manufacture markets.  There has been some reform here in California, where labor contractors are required to pay out FICA, SS, SDI, etc. from their workers wages, and have Workers Compensation insurance, but those with false documents cannot access those programs or recieve income tax with-holding refunds, so I don’t understand your point in this regard.

As far as health care, illegals are in the same boat as 40 million plus US citizens who are without health insurance.  Before you go on about them recieving ‘free’ health care, I suggest you visit the emergency room of any US hospital that is usually the sole recourse for these people, and then tell me how easy they have it.  You could compare the equivalent systems in Canada, Europe or (gasp) Cuba.  You can travel to Cuba, it is just that you might be arrested on returning to the US (land of the free, home of the brave).

Why require employers to go to the expense of going to Mexico to find workers.?  Why not allow Latin Americans temporary visas to travel here in search of jobs where the employers seldom even bother with advertising in local newspapers?

Peaches are not a subsidized crop.  Prices are regulated by the market.  The plant where I work used to be a grower owned co-op until the dumbasses hired a hot-shot CEO who ransacked the company, drove it into bankrupcy and left with a monster ‘golden parachute’.  Now it’s an LLC owned by the insurance company that held the largest share of debt.  It’s on the block now and they’re manuevering things so the new owners can squeeze out the Union.  Don’cha just love the capitalist system?

Rocco,

“I believe that people casually assume that it’s always been like this.  It hasn’t.”

There has been a massive shifting of wealth due to varied and related actions and policies. It is complex and premeditated and easier to disguise in “the information age.” I would liken it to a fugitive hiding in the crowd.

Wrong thread to pursue, but if interested in a major bipartisan technique, read:
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/2006/0325.html

---------------------

“...I do believe the borders should be viewed differently than are currently perceived.”

A good idea, but unless we have believable border security it is unlikely to happen.

---------------------
“Is it a coincidence that our northern border and our relationship with Canada should be so different; does it not tell of some sort of historic prejudice due to similarity of cultures?”

I expect the language barrier (and lack of) is the single biggest reason.

---------------------
“I think the transparency of the current US-Mexican relationship is essential for change.”

IMO it is a very thinly disguised cooperative arrangement which is rapidly turning the US into the same two-class system Mexico has had since the first Europeans landed in the name of Queen and country.

WTH:

I’m in favor of a well regulated fair market.  As egalitarian as can be reasonably achieved. 

I have no problem with the label libertarian, but left libertarian or social libertarian.  Capital “L” unregulated ‘free-market’ Libertarians can go stuff themselves.  I don’t even mind being called an anarchist, but labels really count for zilch, it’s the ideas behind them that are important.

LB,

IMO G.H.W. Bush chose amnesty rather than deal with a complex problem. At the same time he threw the door open for more illegals to come across.

Bush has indicated he wants a plan which will let those already here illegally, stay and “earn citizenship.” This seems to me to be totally unfair to anyone who went through the legal process from Mexico or other countries.  The fines should be levied on any employerspaying less than minimum.

“Peaches are not a subsidized crop.  Prices are regulated by the market.”

I chose peaches only because you had mentioned them — it could be any crop or product. I keep hearing they are paid extremely low wages for our benefit and the employers could not stay in business without this system. I do not believe that. workers should get nothing less than the minimum wage (and that is too low besides). If they were paid minimum wage or better it is safe to assume the prices would rise.

“Don’cha just love the capitalist system?”

Yes, but only when run fairly.  Soviet communism was never pure either.  Some were always more equal than others.  There is value in open competition and it seems fair that those who work harder or more creatively should receive more . (The Little RED Hen is not a commie story.) :-)

Most of my life I was anti-union due to the unwarranted demands they made — and got. Now management is obscenely over paid.

“Before you go on about them recieving ‘free’ health care, I suggest you visit the emergency room of any US hospital that is usually the sole recourse for these people, and then tell me how easy they have it.”

My wife has been both a volunteer and an employe at a local hospital for over twenty years. People who cannot pay are not turned away, but using the emergency room is the most expensive way to care for them. It dilutes the staff’s ability to care for genuine emergency cases and it also adds 30 percent to the bills of the rest of the patients — boosting insurance costs.

WTH
Completely agree with you that the employers should be hit hard.

Without them, the spectacle of undocumented day-labourers clamouring and competing for work would disappear ?

When I came to france 23years ago, the official system was that employers theoretically suffered heavily for employing ‘black’ labour. In fact there were, and are, very few Inspectors , so it was bad luck if they were caught.  .  The exceptionally scary case for them was when a worker was seriously injured, and being uninsured, the full weight of medical costs, and disability compensation, was charged personally to them, the employer.

When I worked in an icecream factory deep-freezer in 1965 I was pro-union, we needed them !, at the very same time I heard of the absurd restrictive-practices in british ship-building I was very unhappy !

My wife has been both a volunteer and an employe at a local hospital for over twenty years. People who cannot pay are not turned away, but using the emergency room is the most expensive way to care for them. It dilutes the staff’s ability to care for genuine emergency cases and it also adds 30 percent to the bills of the rest of the patients — boosting insurance costs.

I know! Crazy isn’t it?  Add to that the fact that administrative costs of insurance companies runs about 25% of total health care costs compared to ~3% for a program like Medicare.  Total administrative costs at least three times comparable costs in Canada. No wonder that we pay more per capita for health care than any other nation in the developed world.

I don’t see why it is so unfair if undocumented residents are given no enhanced or special opportunities to acquire citizenship and no opportunities are taken away from legal immigrants, especially if the undocumented are required to pay a hefty fine, which is what I understand is being proposed.

The ONLY way to get really good medical care is to go to the best doctors available, in the best equipped medical facility, know everything you can about your own health conditions prior to going, and speak up when you don’t understand or doubt the validity of proposed treatment.

OK, now let’s talk about care for most of us.

While US health care is getting farther out of reach each year, it is still (IMO) the best available anywhere. It possibly cares more for more people as well. (This is largely supposition on my part, based on anecdotal evidence from friends and relatives.)
England: A friend who was traveling with us was treated for a sprained ankle free of charge and with only a short wait. A London friend with a knee problem suffered for over six months following advice to take aspirin and keep it elevated. Finally she was taken care of (including an x-ray) at a private clinic at her own expense. Not happy about having paid high taxes for over sixty years. (We have three MRIs in our city of 150,000 — equal to the whole of Great Britain.)

Canada: Many Canadians come down here due to inadequate equipment and staff. My Doctor’s sister took her infant son to emergency with a high fever and was told, “Take him home and use cool compresses and baths — we don’t do fevers.” Her brother advised her to get him across the border to emergency where they discovered meningitis!

Sweden: The poster boy for government care is way over loaded. A person needing hip surgery had a wait of eight years. My wife’s cousin, a nurse, visited us and got the tour of one of our hospitals. She was impressed by not only the TVs in the rooms, but such things as electrically adjustable beds, digital thermometers, and other monitoring equipment (15 years ago info).

The most recent I have heard is past a certain age many ailments are considered not worth treatment, just pain control.

Prior to getting Medicare I went to my family doctor (on hospital staff) for an exam.  I asked, “Aren’t you going to do any blood work?”

Doc: “OK, what tests do you want us to do?”

Me: “Whatever you think I should have.” (I had presented him with the test results from the VA.)

Doc: “Well, the insurance companies usually balk at any “extras.”

Me: “I’m self-insured and will pay for what the VA didn’t do.”

You may be correct on the Medicare percentage, but I can tell you they increase our annual prepay each year and lower what they pay per problem. It is much value than when I handled my Dad’s bills in the early 1980s.

I could go on forever about drug and insurance companies, but that is a part of the economic screwing we’re getting.

There must be some way to meld the extremes and provide a reasonable level of care.

CORRECTION:

Much less value than when I handled my Dad’s…

edit — does not work with my browser.

I’m on a Mac, must upgrade the system to upgrade my browser, would entail too many headaches and expense. Why I’ve hated computers for the past 16 years.

Had lunch with a bunch of graphics old-timers yesterday.  Heard an upgrade story that has me beat —

In the early 1990s he paid $27,000 to upgrade. My worst single year was just over $10,000. (I sold it 2 years later for the going MacWorld rate of $175 and beat him