Page 1 of 1 pages
The following quotes from this article make it pretty clear what the remedy is.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 9, 2006 at 10:10 AM
WTH,
People have been trying to put their miserable hands of these hardworkin’ good folks out of resentment for a long time. I say back off!! Most ot these people are law abiding hardworking G-d fearin’ folks whose only crime is impatience with the immigration system. Big Deal. They don’t use more services than other people and they don’t commit more crime. Stop reading Barb Coe’s racist newsletter. The illegals that commit crimes are the same gangster thugs from Tihajauna who running over the border to pursue criminal activity and who have no intention of staying here. They don’t represent the vast majority of migrants who are here to work.
We should be a bilingual nation like Canada. We would be a better educated and more tolerant society if all forced to learn two languages. Perhaps this is precisely why the right resists it. The consequent enlightened political effects would utterly devastate them. Here in Chicago, a quite diverse place, I run across European businessmen who speak upwards of six different languages. They are generally no liberals but can’t understand why we aren’t an officially bilingual society-English and Spanish. To them its a no brainer. Nobody from the outside gets the “English only” attitude. I guess its just another facet of our egocentric cretinism.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Nov 19, 2006 at 12:31 PM
Cabby in Chi,
It is probably a big deal to all the people who are following the legitimate process for immigration
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 21, 2006 at 2:45 PM
It is often forgotten that people who cross illegally go through incredible hardship. Moreso than the one’s who cross legally. They have breached the law to be sure. It isn’t really the right thing to do. But it is no excuse to steal their money. My understanding is that most of the real vindictive rage against illegals, who are coming here in lower numbers that they were ten years ago, is coming from the deep south (excluding Texas and Florida) where illegal immigration is hitting Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. I should have figured these nice Christian folks would vent their maniacal rage at the very sight of someone “racially” different. Southern Xenaphobia strikes again.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Nov 22, 2006 at 2:02 PM
cabdriver,
This not just addressed to you, but your latest comments reminded me of something I have been aware of for some time.
The overall thrust of the articles on this site…
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 24, 2006 at 7:04 AM
Redhorse,
The following is something I just sent to cabdriver on the
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 24, 2006 at 7:28 AM
WTH,
It does seem to be true that white people in the southern states I mentioned are more prejudiced than others and that their backlash is providing a good deal of the impetus for immigration reform. Perhaps many illegals were purposely directed to these states in order to produce the backlash. I have been one ot the writers pleading for a complex understanding of this issue and for a minimum use of generalizations, stereo-typed imagary, and hyperbole.
I know laws exist for good reasons and should be obeyed. Immigration laws must be adhered to in the interest of national security and social stability. Still, I have a personal bias against immigration restrictions. I am a Jew. Many Jews died needlessly in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s because the US closed the doors even as the country-of-origin-quotas remained vastly underfilled as established by the 1924 National Origins Immigration Act. It is widely believed that this law was discriminatory due to the prejudicial assignment of quotas to the various areas of Europe. Countries with high demand like Italy, Russian, and Poland recieved low priority despite high demand for US visas. Countries like England and Ireland received high priority despite less need and demand for visas to enter the US. Of course, the turning back of the ship the St. Louis to Germany which was filled with Jewish refugees going back to certain death is a famous incident. These refugees would not have become a public liability as they were coming with money and would not only have been self-supporting but a boon to the US depressed economy. Any doubts of this fact are generally dispelled by a close examination of Jewish immigration and capital importation to Wartime British Palestine, a bastion of growth which required absolutely none of the usual financial support from London! I often wonder if we had no 1924 Immigration Law to be concerned with would we be dealing with the Israel/Palestine issue today!
Immigration law is new. Perhaps it is a feature of modernity. UK writer Theresa Hayter believes this to be the case. She points out that people have freely moved about all through history until recently. As a Marxist, she views modern immigration restrictions as a legal means to guide, control, and discipline the global labor supply on behalf of global capital. Open borders should thus be part of the progressive agenda of freeing and advancing the cause of labor. Some open borders advocates on the left feel that it is not so much illegal labor’s arrival in the US but their continued illegal status that drives down US wages. It has been estimated that a blanket amnesty could lift the wages of all US workers below the median wage by between 2% and 5% in a short time. There are open borders advocates on the right, mostly libertarians, who argue that like all else in society, labor migration produces an equilibrium in the long run because as jobs fill up in the US, migration will stop as wages rise and working conditions improve in Mexico automatically to prevent a labor shortage there. Eventually, a balance is reached in global labor markets. Interestingly, this is one free market theory that we, as a society, don’t care to embrace.
This issue creates strange bedfellows. Some liberals are concerned about the effects on domestic labor while conservatives want free labor markets, especially when it comes to helping both cash crop growers and urban employers in the hospitality and service industries.
I believe that economics always trumps. No gains will come from nativist attempts to brand illegal immigration a national security risk, even in a post-9/11 world. As long as labor shortages persist in so many different industries from agriculture to health care immigration, both legal and illegal, will be tolerated.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Nov 24, 2006 at 12:21 PM
cabdriver,
In 1963 I was in Alabama while in the army. I had never been that far south before and was appalled at the White Only and Colored Only signs.
I can
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 25, 2006 at 7:52 AM
Your points are well taken. Health, economic, and safety concerns all trump the desire to return to a lost forever world of total freedom of movement. I guess immigration laws exist to protect society. No one has the right to bring disease into a place where it doesn’t exist or use open borders to get away with crimes. Also a society’s capacity to absorb people is limited no matter how wealthy that society. Having said this, however, I so think that we give a generous conditional amnesty and address the labor market needs in the US as well as the need for economic reforms in those countries which are now the greatest source of immigration to the US. According to Sociologist Saskia Sassen (also a Swede) there is a high positive correlation between countries that received and continue to receive significant amounts of US foreign direct investment and high rates of labor outmigration to the US. Many locals are displaced by our direct investment. This is because new labor saving production displaces jobs and floods the market with cheap light and durable consumer goods which has an immediate net negative effect on local employment.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Nov 25, 2006 at 10:31 PM
Cabdriver,
I would like to…1.) stop the illegal crossings (I personally don
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 26, 2006 at 9:29 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
The following quotes from this article make it pretty clear what the remedy is.
WTH,
People have been trying to put their miserable hands of these hardworkin’ good folks out of resentment for a long time. I say back off!! Most ot these people are law abiding hardworking G-d fearin’ folks whose only crime is impatience with the immigration system. Big Deal. They don’t use more services than other people and they don’t commit more crime. Stop reading Barb Coe’s racist newsletter. The illegals that commit crimes are the same gangster thugs from Tihajauna who running over the border to pursue criminal activity and who have no intention of staying here. They don’t represent the vast majority of migrants who are here to work.
We should be a bilingual nation like Canada. We would be a better educated and more tolerant society if all forced to learn two languages. Perhaps this is precisely why the right resists it. The consequent enlightened political effects would utterly devastate them. Here in Chicago, a quite diverse place, I run across European businessmen who speak upwards of six different languages. They are generally no liberals but can’t understand why we aren’t an officially bilingual society-English and Spanish. To them its a no brainer. Nobody from the outside gets the “English only” attitude. I guess its just another facet of our egocentric cretinism.
Cabby in Chi,
It is probably a big deal to all the people who are following the legitimate process for immigration
It is often forgotten that people who cross illegally go through incredible hardship. Moreso than the one’s who cross legally. They have breached the law to be sure. It isn’t really the right thing to do. But it is no excuse to steal their money. My understanding is that most of the real vindictive rage against illegals, who are coming here in lower numbers that they were ten years ago, is coming from the deep south (excluding Texas and Florida) where illegal immigration is hitting Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. I should have figured these nice Christian folks would vent their maniacal rage at the very sight of someone “racially” different. Southern Xenaphobia strikes again.
cabdriver,
This not just addressed to you, but your latest comments reminded me of something I have been aware of for some time.
The overall thrust of the articles on this site…
Redhorse,
The following is something I just sent to cabdriver on the
WTH,
It does seem to be true that white people in the southern states I mentioned are more prejudiced than others and that their backlash is providing a good deal of the impetus for immigration reform. Perhaps many illegals were purposely directed to these states in order to produce the backlash. I have been one ot the writers pleading for a complex understanding of this issue and for a minimum use of generalizations, stereo-typed imagary, and hyperbole.
I know laws exist for good reasons and should be obeyed. Immigration laws must be adhered to in the interest of national security and social stability. Still, I have a personal bias against immigration restrictions. I am a Jew. Many Jews died needlessly in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s because the US closed the doors even as the country-of-origin-quotas remained vastly underfilled as established by the 1924 National Origins Immigration Act. It is widely believed that this law was discriminatory due to the prejudicial assignment of quotas to the various areas of Europe. Countries with high demand like Italy, Russian, and Poland recieved low priority despite high demand for US visas. Countries like England and Ireland received high priority despite less need and demand for visas to enter the US. Of course, the turning back of the ship the St. Louis to Germany which was filled with Jewish refugees going back to certain death is a famous incident. These refugees would not have become a public liability as they were coming with money and would not only have been self-supporting but a boon to the US depressed economy. Any doubts of this fact are generally dispelled by a close examination of Jewish immigration and capital importation to Wartime British Palestine, a bastion of growth which required absolutely none of the usual financial support from London! I often wonder if we had no 1924 Immigration Law to be concerned with would we be dealing with the Israel/Palestine issue today!
Immigration law is new. Perhaps it is a feature of modernity. UK writer Theresa Hayter believes this to be the case. She points out that people have freely moved about all through history until recently. As a Marxist, she views modern immigration restrictions as a legal means to guide, control, and discipline the global labor supply on behalf of global capital. Open borders should thus be part of the progressive agenda of freeing and advancing the cause of labor. Some open borders advocates on the left feel that it is not so much illegal labor’s arrival in the US but their continued illegal status that drives down US wages. It has been estimated that a blanket amnesty could lift the wages of all US workers below the median wage by between 2% and 5% in a short time. There are open borders advocates on the right, mostly libertarians, who argue that like all else in society, labor migration produces an equilibrium in the long run because as jobs fill up in the US, migration will stop as wages rise and working conditions improve in Mexico automatically to prevent a labor shortage there. Eventually, a balance is reached in global labor markets. Interestingly, this is one free market theory that we, as a society, don’t care to embrace.
This issue creates strange bedfellows. Some liberals are concerned about the effects on domestic labor while conservatives want free labor markets, especially when it comes to helping both cash crop growers and urban employers in the hospitality and service industries.
I believe that economics always trumps. No gains will come from nativist attempts to brand illegal immigration a national security risk, even in a post-9/11 world. As long as labor shortages persist in so many different industries from agriculture to health care immigration, both legal and illegal, will be tolerated.
cabdriver,
In 1963 I was in Alabama while in the army. I had never been that far south before and was appalled at the White Only and Colored Only signs.
I can
Your points are well taken. Health, economic, and safety concerns all trump the desire to return to a lost forever world of total freedom of movement. I guess immigration laws exist to protect society. No one has the right to bring disease into a place where it doesn’t exist or use open borders to get away with crimes. Also a society’s capacity to absorb people is limited no matter how wealthy that society. Having said this, however, I so think that we give a generous conditional amnesty and address the labor market needs in the US as well as the need for economic reforms in those countries which are now the greatest source of immigration to the US. According to Sociologist Saskia Sassen (also a Swede) there is a high positive correlation between countries that received and continue to receive significant amounts of US foreign direct investment and high rates of labor outmigration to the US. Many locals are displaced by our direct investment. This is because new labor saving production displaces jobs and floods the market with cheap light and durable consumer goods which has an immediate net negative effect on local employment.
Cabdriver,
I would like to…1.) stop the illegal crossings (I personally don
Your proposals seem reasonable.
register a new account »Posting Security