The usual
common sense from Tamar Jacoby on the Senate immigration battle.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, April 5th, 2006 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Main.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
Unfortunately her “common sense” appears to include the “guest-worker” option that business loves and Fareed Zakaria warns against as exactly the wrong premise on which to bring folks into the country.
“Leg Number Two: Given our economy’s growing need for foreign workers – and no one who has looked honestly at the economy can deny that – we need to create a way for migrant laborers to enter the country legally. Instead of fueling demand for human smugglers and document forgers, we need to give workers a lawful option, then wield our enhanced enforcement muscle to make sure that they use it.”
We already have a way for new people from other lands to help replenish a growing workforce and enhance our culture. It’s called legal immigration and citizenship. If it ever reaches the point where we need more people to fuel economic growth, there are plenty of folks waiting in line for green-cards that offer a pathe to citizenship. This clearly isn’t what Tamar is talking about, because it doesn’t require an entire new set of laws.
Tamar – as usual – is full of pro-business bullshit that gives a fig-leaf to the industries that have incorporated ultra-low-wage immigrants into their business plans. But she’s very nice compared to, say, the guys who actually run the sweatshops that feed off of this argument.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
I agree with what her proposal with one caveat: in any comprehensive bill worth supporting, the Mexican flag wavers and the cheap labor lobby should be as upset with the border security and workplace verification provisions as Tom Tancredo is with the amnesty provisions.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
Regarding the question of who’s “looked honestly at the economy”, my view – one about which I’m adamant – is that as soon as labor markets aren’t being gamed wholesale by employers breaking the law to get the cheapest, most compliant labor possible, I’m willing to entertain the notion that the problem is labor shortages. Until then, this argument of Jacoby’s is just routine libertarian ideology rooted in contempt for an inclusive social contract or even minimal social democracy. I’m sure you’ve got some argument about “actually existing bogus compromises by Beltway whores” as opposed to my unhinged utopian plea that businesses obey the law, Marc, but so far as I can tell you’ve got dueling banjos here with Jacoby and Zakariah and one of them is badly out of tune.
April 5th, 2006 at 1:02 pm
I think you need to read closer, Reg. Fareed opposes a guest worker program that would codify workers as second class entities with no route to citizenship. So does Tamar. They 100% agree on that point.
You simply dont know what ur talking about here. In my orginal post on this I think the nite of the big march in L.A. I linked to Tamar’s piece in the WashPo where she specifically argued that “guest worker” was an unfortunate label because that is NOT what is being proposed — at least in the European sense of the term.
Kennedy, Grijalva and all the other liberal Dems that you would vote for have signed onto this bill precisely because the “bracero” or German gastarbeiter apspects have been cut out– fortunately.
You’ve posted enough now on this Reg to demand that you cut the bull and spell out in a nitid 3 -4 point program what your plan is to stop illegal immigration and solve this issue. We’re all ears.
Your continuing baiting of Jacoby as a big business shill reveals nothing but ignorance and prejudice. You can do better, as Kerry would say.
April 5th, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Marc – we’ll have to agree to disagree, but the notion that McCain Kennedy isn’t a route to a two-tier workforce doesn’t wash. Why not just expand the number of new citizens. I’m actually for that, nativist that I am. And you still support the “we have a labor shortage” Business Roundtable, et al line, as opposed to “let’s see what kind of a labor shortage we’ve got when wages and working conditions aren’t being driven into the dirt.” You’re a journalist, not a guy who’s got to vote on a bill, so you can afford complexities here and give equal time to different angles of the issue. Jacoby, on the other hand, isn’t a journalist but a paid propagandist for a bunch of libertarian, Hayekian ideologues. She may put some “progressive” lipstick on that particular pig, but she’s no more an independent analyst than Charles Murray was when he was cooking up spew for that same outfit…or McWhorter, or the Thernstroms, ad nauseum. Doesn’t mean she’s got the mark of the beast on her forehead and she probably believes every word she writes, but the Manhattan Institute pays for the promotion of a certain worldview and the minute Jacoby starts writing articles about how we need to hook all of the illegals up with Andy Card, raise the minimum wage to a “working family” level even among full-time unskilled, pay health insurance to employees in agribusiness and push more aggressively to enforce labor regulations across the board in sweatshops, fields, construction sites, or wherever., Tamar’s out of there. You know it and, of course, she knows it.
April 5th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
That’s the extent of the ignorance and prejudice I’m willing to impart today. Gotta flip the internet off and get more work done.
April 5th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
I listened to her and others last night on Charlie Rose. The guest workers would go to the back of the line and pay a fine. This certainly isn’t an amnesty per se, but the emphasis has to be one those at the front of the line. I simply don’t think anyone will come forward. The thousand bucks and 11 year timeframe is enough to discourage participation. That’s the problem with it I see, not the two-tier European model.
April 5th, 2006 at 2:13 pm
“On enforcement, there are two temptations. One is the lure of tough-sounding but unrealistic, ineffective measures: a 700-mile border fence, for instance, would be prohibitively expensive and would do little to stop the illegal traffic”
this is code for leave the border open. everything else she proposes is big government. that’s why politicians love her. i feel like i’m reading a cheap Orwell novel with the convoluted pretzel shaped solutions we all chatter about. JUST CLOSE THE BORDER–WHATEVER THE EXPENSE. in the long run it will be much cheaper. once the border is closed the marketplace will take care of the rest via a 10 year green card straightline to citizenship.
here’s a trip down memory lane. when this came out we had a illegal problem of 3.5 million. now 13 years later its 12-15 million. how many times do we have to bitch slap ourselves to realize these solutions don’t work.
FLASHBACK: Dem Senate Leader Harry Reid: ‘Our Federal Wallet Stretched To Limit By Illegal Aliens Getting Welfare’
‘Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally’
August 5, 1993
The Office of Sen. Harry Reid issued the following:
In response to increased terrorism and abuse of social programs by aliens, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) today introduced the first and only comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress.
Currently, an alien living illegally in the United States often pays no taxes but receives unemployment, welfare, free medical care and other federal benefits. Recent terrorist acts, including the World Trade Center bombing, have underscored the need to keep violent criminals out of the country.
Reid’s bill, the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993, overhauls the nation’s immigration laws and calls for a massive scale-down of immigrants allowed into the country from approximately 800,000 to 300,000.
The bill also changes asylum laws to prevent phony asylum seekers. Reid said the U.S. open door policy is being abused at the expense of honest, working citizens.
“We are a country founded upon fairness and justice,” Reid said. “An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum. But this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America’s inherent generosity and legal system.”
Reid’s bill also cracks down on illegal immigration. The 1990 census reported 3.3 million illegal aliens in America. Recent estimates indicate about 2.5 million immigrants illegally entered the United States last year.
“Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs,” Reid said. “The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement.
“Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes.
“Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. “Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally,” Reid said.
Specific provisions of Reid’s Immigration Stabilization Act include the following:
– Reduces annual legal immigration levels from approximately 800,000 admissions per year to about 300,000. Relatives other than spouse or minor children will be admitted only if already on immigration waiting lists and their admission does not raise annual immigration levels above 300,000.
– Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony “asylum” claims.
– Expands list of felonies considered “aggravated” felonies requiring exclusion and deportation of criminal aliens. Allows courts to order deportation at time of sentencing.
– Increases penalties for failing to depart or re-entering the United States after a final order of deportation order. Increases maximum penalties for visa fraud from five years to 10 years.
– Curtails alien smuggling by authorizing interdiction and repatriation of aliens seeking to enter the United States unlawfully by sea. Increases penalties for alien smuggling.
– Adds “alien smuggling” to the list of crimes subject to sanctions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Expands the categories of property that are forfeited when used to facilitate the smuggling or harboring of illegal aliens.
– Clarifies that a person born in the United States to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen. This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the United States illegally, often at risk to mother and child, for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.
– Mandates that aliens who cannot demonstrably support themselves without public or private assistance are excludable. This will prevent admission of aliens likely to be dependent on public financial support. This requirement extends to the sponsor of any family sponsored immigrant.
– Increases border security and patrol officers to 9,900 full-time positions.
April 5th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
From Tamar: “Given our economy’s growing need for foreign workers – and no one who has looked honestly at the economy can deny that”
I can’t resist stepping in and pointing out yet again the error Tamar consistently makes: claiming our economy needs unskilled foreign workers. It doesn’t. Skilled, yes–but she’s collapsing skilled and unskilled, which doesn’t wash.
This false claim is similar to another Marc continues to carelessly bandy about: that we have a labor shortage. We don’t. Hell, even uber-libertarian (in name) Tom Grey admits that.
Rather than waste your time reading Tamara’s not-so-common sensicalities, you’ll find more honest and compelling attempts to follow the various immigration proposals ofer at Kaus’s place:
http://www.slate.com/id/2139347/?nav=fix
April 5th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
Can we get on to something else Marc? I really think everything that can be said about iimigration has been said. If you feel so strongly about this just advocate open borders and be done with it. But don’t be suprised if this turns out to be a minority position. By the way – when A.N.S.W.E.R. and the WSJ are on the same page how do you feel? Me? I’m with Reg. We will probably need new immigration since our aging population is not replacing young workers but the emphasis should be on US NEEDS. And when over half the new immigrants have less than a High School Education the idea that they can staff a 21st Century high tech economy is ludicrous. Or is our future to be an economy of WalMart and Mickey Ds? Try running an empire on that!
El Salvador, I believe, has some very rich people. But that is not the economy I want. Do you?
April 5th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
RLC: Glad to have u back– but are u crazy? You’re made so uncomfortable by this subject I should move on?
Remember there is an historic Senate debate going on as we speak that will shape policy for decades to come, and you’d like to tune out from it a day or two short of its resolution?
U’ll have to explain that one to me.
This is an area I that I also formally study and follow as part of my work at USC.
The good news is that there are 30.7 million other blogs out there. Dont want to lose you Richard, but you are free to temporarily tune away when you dont like what’s in the news.
April 5th, 2006 at 3:10 pm
“Some people thought it would never happen – thought Congress would never get serious about fixing our dysfunctional immigration systemâ€
CONGRESS GET SERIOUS ABOUT FIXING AN ISSUE— JOHN MCENROE USE TO SAY TO REFEREES AT A TENNIS MATCH: “YOU CAN’T BE SERIOUSâ€â€”Congress will only create more dysfunction by masterminding a bill that panders to voters, rather than acknowledge that the immigration phenomena, is another manifestation of their failed economic policies—the search for cheaper labor, a mentality which has prevailed for more than three decades, overlooking the massive exodus of Mexicans across the border, until it has reached such overwhelming proportions that it can no longer be ignored.
The security threat that illegal immigration poses is not in the form of terrorism, but merely by the sheer numbers of their population, and the power that they NOW possess, through their mobilization which can easy disrupt an already vulnerable economy.
So business as usually– corporations and greedy Americans get bitten in their ass, by their own greedy policies and are then extorted into half-ass remedies. No thought is ever given to the future, or the logical progression of events that will ultimately occur—the only concern is how do we make money NOW!!!
April 5th, 2006 at 3:12 pm
Marc, forgive me if you’ve addressed this already and I have missed it, but would you support the Senate bill if the border security and workplace verification provisions of the House bill were added to it?
If you do, great, that’s my idea of the best possible solution too.
If not, I’d like to know why. And if your answer includes the sarcastic comment asking about why don’t we also put up a wall along the Canadian border — something that I hear a lot when talking to La Raza sympathizers — wouldn’t it be more honorable just to unabashedly come out on the principle of open borders?
To the best of my knowledge, the Senate bill, as written, contains NO meaningful border control provisions.
April 5th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
The Sneate bill has virtually all of the enforcement provisions that the House versiob does minus:
1) the 700 mile wall
2) the felonization of aliens and their supporters.
April 5th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
I know I said I was done with this but I reserve the right to be contrary – just another old fart! The “historic” debate will produce nothing since Bill Frist want to massage the GOP base and no bill will please them./ And if the Senate passes a bill it won’t survive conference with the House as Tancredo and Sensenbrenner make this the Republican lifesaver issue.
Oh Marc, did you see that appearence by mister straight talk, John McCain, at a union conference. After being heckeled and booed the Arizona Senator got testy and brought out the “they do jobs you won’t” line and when someone shouted “pay decent wages” he said the audience would not pick lettuce for $50/hr. “You don’t have the stamina”, he said to do it all day. Anyone here want a fifty buck an hour job in the Imperial Valley? Call Sen. McCain’s office. Or maybe you Marc?
April 5th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
rlc, it’s funny you mention that, because I had a rather surreal dream last night that I was at a news conference at John McCain’s house, except that he didn’t invite us and the whole situation was tense with FBI agents scanning the grounds. Plus I spilled grape juice on his living room floor. (I told you it was surreal.)
The point is, McCain comes across as a major league asshole poseur and corporate shill, and my subconscious was warning/ reminding me of that last night. Just thought you all should know.
April 5th, 2006 at 4:24 pm
Reg I missed his appearance on THE DAILY SHOW but it appears Jon Stewart cut him a new one over his recent remarks saying all is well with Falwell and company. Some of the goodwill he amassed is getting trashed.
April 5th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
“it appears Jon Stewart cut him a new one over his recent remarks saying all is well with Falwell and company”
Ditto, on Meet the Press:
http://www.salon.com/ent/video_dog/politics/2006/04/03/mccain/index.html
April 5th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Oh and off-topic: anyone else want to discuss Sen John Kerry’s plan in the NYT to get us out of Iraq? Juan Cole’s remarks today might be a good starting point.
April 5th, 2006 at 4:31 pm
RLC: Yes, McCain’s a hypocrite. And Teddy Kennedy let his girl friend drown at a Chappaquiddick. What’s that got to do with anything?
Im waitinf to hear you geniuses come up with an immigration plan. Currently we have the worst of all worlds: a permanent and illegal sub-class of unrecognized and exploited low wage foreign workers; a decline in union density; a stangant minimum wage; families torn asunder by immig law; workers not allowed to have drivers licences nor workman’ comp; etc etc. What was ur plan? Im sorry I didnt catch it the first 25 times around.
April 5th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
My plan? Let me repeat it for the umpteenth time:
1. REAL Sanctions on employers who hire illegals. Including stiff fines, jail time and asset confiscation.
2. Some sort of legalisation process along the lines of the McCain-Kennedy proposal
3. A joint US/Canada/Mexico program to develop underdevloped areas in North America along the lines used by the EU to raise standards in Europe. This would include revisiting NAFTA and strong requirements that the aid recipients meet agreed targets. There is a proposal from a former World bank Economist for a ten year $300 Billion aid package with half the money to come from us and the other half to be financed by Mexico. Let us discuss this.
There is that clear enough for you?
April 5th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
You “pay decent wages” nativist racists are pretty sickening. If you want to pay poor people more, start a farm, or a copy business, and hire poor people for more than they’re currently making. Maybe a million Americans will try that in the next couple years ( mostly Rep voters.)
The truth is they do low-skilled jobs that anybody healthy could do, but for less than most Americans would do it. Often less than the legal minimum wage — clearly demonstrating how bad the minimum wage is in destroying legal jobs.
Want a law abiding society? Scrap minimum wage laws so any agreement by an employer and an employee is legal.
Many like Balter are quick to call pro-war folk “chickenhawks”; ‘why not go to iraq’ blah blah. Well, I’m too old — I joined the USNA in 74, ready to go to Vietnam, but too late; the Dems voted to run away.
Anybody in America can easily start a business and hire people at higher wages. But the peaceful customers don’t always want to buy higher priced products.
Reg, Michael, Eleanore, Rich — how many poor people have you paid decent wages to in the last year? How much do you really care about them? Not enough to hire many of them, probably.
Yet willing to use gov’t violence against peaceful folk who ARE willing to to hire the really really poor — since those poor don’t have stars on their bellies, or aren’t white, or aren’t male, or aren’t American or some reason you use to justify treating human beings like human waste and tossing them in the garbage. Or “go back home” to whatever hell-hole you illegally ran away from, “your kind” is too poor to be here. Ruins the value of the neighborhood.
Bah.
There’s always plenty of work to do — just not always plenty of people willing to pay for the work. The only real long term solution has to be to improve Mexico’s economy; and US aid won’t do it; they need entrepreneurs; and better laws / procedures for following the laws.
The US Left also needs entreprenuers; but is too busy being a victim and complaining they don’t get enough gov’t cash.
The failure of the union movement in the US is that they always had the power to achieve the Marxist dream “owning the means of production” — but consistently wanted more cash for consumption rather than stock ownership of the companies they work for.
April 5th, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Here’s something wonderfully simple (and common-sensical!) that has yet to be seriously tried: start enforcing employer penalties on a realistic (as opposed to token) scale. Each time I’ve read on this blog someone bring up the idea of penalizing employers for hiring violations, I hear the hyperbolic rejoinder that it will be impossible to put a cop in every workplace, etc. That’s irrelevant, and has little to do with the actual practice of enforcement. Forgive me for being anecdotal again, but the reality is that even in the height of post-IIRIRA (Clinton’s 1996 immigrant reform bill), when companies were pressured by the INS to make social security number checks, penalties were, in practice, nil. I attended a number of Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights during the mid-90′s, and we immigrant rights workers discussed ways of reassuring employers: one method (which I practiced many times myself) was simply informing employer representatives who were nervous about hiring immigrants that penalties would not be assessed for their UNKNOWINGLY hiring immigrants. In other words, the process was quite simple: INS contacts employers to make social security number checks, employers compare reported with actual numbers, and fire the ones that don’t match. Immigrants suffer deportation, while companies simply suffer the inconvenience of hiring new workers (often a new batch of undocumented, since INS is woefully understaffed and would rarely hit the same company twice): but NO FINES. Again, I cannot stress how common this practice was, and how quickly employers learned that the law was not going to seriously affect them.
So Marc, and others who continually scoff at the notion of actually enforcing employer penalties and sanctions, the onus is on you to prove why this is impossible or undesirable. Especially since, crucially, it has NOT been adequately or sincerely attempted.
April 5th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
“The truth is they do low-skilled jobs that anybody healthy could do, but for less than most Americans would do it”
Tom, why do you refuse to listen? Why do you think they do low-skilled jobs for less? Because: A) the pay is better than in their home countries; and, crucially, B) because the pay can be spent in their home countries. Low wages in the U.S. are very high wages in Mexico and Central America, which produce a higher standard of living for immigrants in their home countries, but these same abysmal wages for a resident of Compton equate to horrible poverty in the U.S. THAT, my friend, is what is sickening.
And, as odd as it is to once again have to explain this to a self-professed “libertarian” like yourself: the market will dictate what labor is worth. If the price of picking strawberries has been held artificially (read: illegally) low, then it’s time for the market to respond, and, yes, no strawberry shortcake for the Grey family this 4th of July. Enough of the hypocritical claims that the market must dictate when it’s good for employers, but when it’s good for employees we need to change the rules. Again: that’s the sickening part, which you seem nauseatingly eager to embrace.
Here’s the simple truth, Tom: while you prattle on about the necessity of employers, I’ll conveniently remind you that there is no employer without employee. In fact, there’s no God-determined difference between the two, necessarily. But when there is, both sides need to hold hands and work together (that last statement was intentional silliness, because I’m a lover–not a fighter).
April 5th, 2006 at 7:28 pm
rich et al………
it’s amazing that consenting adults could possibly believe that new laws or old ones, promised to be enforced, will solve a 30 year old problem. previously i alluded to senator reid’s delusions above. ok, how about barbara jordan’s immigration report that took four years to complete 1990-94. central to her thesis was a FENCE SEALING THE BORDER. internal registration and compliance by employers and green card holders. every possible detail is spelled out to microscopic clarity. countless speeches, conferences, committees etc later the illegal population has gone up 3-4 fold since. so rich et al why would a person with more than a double digit i.q. pay any attention to your blather if it doesn’t include a fence. how are we going to deport the bad guys if they can walk right back in? what’s our control mechanism?
on a side note. i personally don’t know what the wages of migrant farm workers are and i don’t know how many illegals are involved in the occupation. what i do know, in very exact terms, is what the wages are in san francisco for illegals working in the trades. $10/hr for go-fers picked up at home depot etc . very few contractors actually use them. home owners are their stock and trade. semi-skilled and up used by contractors start at $15 and go up to $30ish. you get paid on your knowledge and skill. illegal/legal its all the same. the notion that evil contractors make mountains of money on them is nation magazine propaganda. anyone who even mentions it can be ignored. the bid process on a project is very competitive. the average contractor is a single guy who worked his way up through the trades and now has a couple of long term helpers. all three of them push their own tools. usually the guy that gets the bid makes about $5-10hr on each guy as payment for getting the work and running the job. out of that comes liability insurance etc. if you are a decent guy you will let their kid brothers hang out and be gofers so they can learn a trade. workers are usually paid by cash/personal check. why? because you can’t put them on the books–workers comp etc if you are a licensed contractor. i have yet to meet a contractor who hasn’t paid medical costs on the rare times it comes up. lots of the illegals pay tax…
“Did you know that the IRS provides illegal aliens with a special number (in lieu of social security) to use for paying taxes? It does. The implied promise is that illegals paying taxes will have an advantage when it comes to gaining citizenship. Indeed, the IRS trains and funds people to do outreach and convince them to participate in the program. How more absurd can the government get?”….judith klinghoffer
now the question that should be asked is why always illegals? because that’s the marketplace. it has nothing to do with wages. if you place an add tomorrow for workers, 99 out of 100 respondents will be hispanic. the only white person that will respond will be an ex-con on parole who needs to show he’s employed. not one black or asian will respond. the chinese run their own game–now there’s where wages are low. you will never outbid a chinese crew. never.
you think i’m kidding about who shows up for work, look at new orleans.
so please stop writng about stuff like a bunch of academics. close the border. wages will rise, folks will assimilate, englsh will be learned and your grandkids will marry hispanics. these are some of the best people that have risked life and limb to get here. we are lucky to have them and they want to be citizens.
1978—local 4, journeyman painter, high outside danger pay(hang off buildings on block and tackle) $16.12 per hour. 32 weeks a year to qualify for pension etc–very few painters worked 32 weeks a year, the shops made sure of that.
2003–$20/hr cash for same 25 years later!!
please, close the border and start paying for your salad that you enjoy tonight. don’t give me your bullshit rules and regulations and i think this and i think that. your pathetic. yeah, lets fine them, arrest them, put them on trains.
joe stalin, mao and like would be real proud of all you apparatchiks.
April 5th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
“it has nothing to do with wages. if you place an add tomorrow for workers, 99 out of 100 respondents will be hispanic.”
For the millionth time, to you and anyone else who prefers making up stories to observing what’s happening around them: if the job paid shit wages, you’re right. If not, you’re wrong. I worked in the business firsthand. I know what wages people work for, because my ass was out in the field, hustling contacts and negotiating wages. So don’t give me your crap about academia–if you took the time to read any of my other posts you wouldn’t make such an asinine statment.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:00 pm
It’s hard to make any sense out of what Reid says by the end of one of these screeds. But then I was just a journeyman at the hall working the list to get on with Bechtel at $22.50 plus benefits in 1984.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
rich et al
i have read all your’s and all the other posts for the last two weeks.–that why i said et al.
i said i didn’t know what wages were for migrant farm workers or how many were employed. but what i did say very clearly is i pushed my own tools. i don’t make stories up and i don’t suggest as you and others do gestapo remedies for your academic solutions to the real world. just close the border, everybody keep their mouths shut and let the marketplace sort out the details. we don’t want 30 more years of your kind of solutions, conferences, committees and cicle jerks that leads to another 15 million illegals, fines and arrests and $20/hr for painting 25 years from now.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:06 pm
mark
16.12 —1978–high outside zelinsky&sons, 32 weeks necessary for a pension
April 5th, 2006 at 8:22 pm
Reid I’m still unclear on what it is you support? $22.50 1984 Bechtel Santa Rosa, CA. Heavey commericial carpenter’s local 751. In the 90′s in was $116.50 in Salt Lake City. I took it. Pensions and vesting have always been tough to get. Try SAG if you that’s bad. Hoo boy…
April 5th, 2006 at 8:24 pm
That’s a typo: $16.50 Utah, you know.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:44 pm
Here’s a new idea.
At the first Democratic gubernatorial debate, which was this afternoon at the taping of Univision’s Voz y Voto program, Phil Angelides suggested California public pension funds to stimulate job development in Mexico.
April 5th, 2006 at 10:02 pm
mark,
the reason i go “off” is frustration. i worked with illegals for 15 years under the circumstances i described. i don’t even know where to begin.
basically after arriving at this site because of a link about immigration i started reading all the posts. here’s an outsiders view of what i read. every suggestion/solution, except in a very few, was directed at employers or employees based on certain theories, platitudes or what was perceived to be “what good for them”. never not once did anyone accept guilt for setting up the system that trapped both employer and employee. if it was remotely alluded to the remedy was stalinist statist actions ie. fines, round ups, deportations, more government etc–basically treating people as parts of some academic round table.
every time marc posts a new related topic the posts all end up at the same place. finally i blow my to top.
if you go back and read all my posts the rant is the same. we caused this problem and we are not allowed under any circumstances to blame it on the illegals or their employers. while i admit i don’t know about immigrant farm workers nor their numbers i do know about the 100,000′s small contractors who hire one or two. there’s no dark conspiracy to manipulate, abuse or take advantage of our fellow workers. so when i hear it talked about or implied i realize this is just a intellectual exercise for most.
i trust people and the free market. sure it has its warts but its way more competent than central planning. i want the border closed for a number of reasons one of which is to boost the wages of trades people. the other thing i want is citizenship for these workers. they deserve it. if for no other reason than putting salad on your table for 30 years.
it will take you all of 20 minutes to read all my posts on the two or three immigration headings. you will see a constant thread. close the border, issue 10 year green cards, boot out the criminals and be done with it. then control all future immigration per ethnic group as we used to. unless it escaped me, no one else jumps to mind who recommends closing the border with a fence–strengthen is not the same-that’s code for leave it open.
i apologize to anyone i have offended. i rarely comment on anything else so i’ll be gone when they pass the next set of BS proposals and we will have this circle jerk in 20 years.
i almost came out of retirement when i saw $116/hr.!
April 5th, 2006 at 10:31 pm
bill,
that’s money down a rat hole and we all know it. only phil would be stupid enough to propose it. 15 or so families run 80% of mexico. it’s a debased spanish colonial swamp. if we close the border and not provide a vent for millions of their strongest–you have to be mentally tough to give it up and cross a border–there will be a economic/social revolution within 20 years. mexico is a bastard corrupt society that we let flourish. that’s why vincente fox is against a fence. you should read the mexican constitution.
if we truly want to help mexico we shouldn’t let any more come here.
April 6th, 2006 at 7:53 am
some flag waving is worse than others, I had to link to this (via KungFu Monkey)
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2006_04_02_patriotboy_archive.html#114413379152791975
April 6th, 2006 at 11:52 am
OK I get it now. It’s valid proposal. A plan offered.
April 6th, 2006 at 11:55 am
“if we truly want to help mexico we shouldn’t let any more come here.”
Yeah that’s a plan and a critical part of the solution.
July 25th, 2006 at 12:21 pm
Ich can mich an dich uberhaupt poker nicht errinern.xvv
February 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 pm
ks online poker casino software…
slouch!pun altruistically pervaded bank loans [url=http://www.onlybankloans.com/#]bank loans[/url] http://www.onlybankloans.com/# …
April 4th, 2007 at 11:19 am
cingular 8525 review
cingular 8525 | cingular jack
May 9th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
28a632fb0429…
28a632fb042916a018e4…
May 29th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
June 3rd, 2010 at 1:11 am
Nise site, Real diflucan, [url= http://wiki.oracle.com/account/diflucanonline ]Real diflucan[/url], 70445,
June 30th, 2010 at 7:14 am