Republicans Smother Immigration Reform
The fundamentalist faction among House Republicans have gotten their way. On Tuesday, they effectively killed off any last hope of meaningful immigration reform -- at least for this year.
Instead of going into conference that would have tried to reconcile the more liberal measure passed by the Senate with the restrictionist bill passed last year by the House, the GOP leadership has come up, instead,  with a bogus plan to hold hearings over the summer and drag things out indefinitely.
I say bogus because the hearings will be nothing more than a rolling caravan of staged 'field' events, designed to pander to the hard-core Republican base -- the folks who fear they will turn to stone everytime they hear someone say buenos dias in a 7-11. Instead of comprehensive reform we get a two-bit dog and pony show starring such bizarre creatures as Tommy Tancredo.
Kudos to Denny Hastert and John Boehner for their skill in making sure no constructive legislation gets through. I guess all the bluster about what a danger it is to national security to have the southern border out of control was just so much hot air. If it were such a crisis, then why isn't the House acting immediately instead of putting things off?
So for the time being there will be no guest or temporary worker program; no expansion of legal channels of immigration; and nothing done about the 12 million people undocumented already living here.
Well, maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration. We will continue with low wages. The Republicans have vowed to oppose Ted Kennedy's new proposal for a phased $2 an hour increase in the minimum wage. Just for the record, the current sweat-shop level of $5.15 has not moved up one penny in nine years. It's really kind of a staggering thought, if you can bear to think about it for more than 5 seconds.
P.S. When I was down in Altar, Mexico a few weeks ago I was accompanied by ten reporters and their editors -- participants in a professional journalism fellowship I help run out of USC. A number of good border reports have come out of the trip. Let me highlight a piece by Dudley Althaus of the Houston Chronicle. And check out this multi-media report by Chron editor Tracy Eaton.
June 20th, 2006 at 11:40 pm
I’m certainly no economist, so someone help me out here.
Isn’t it extraordinarily foolish to think about raising the minimum wage while at the same time taking steps that will encourage even more massive illegal immigration?
If anything containing even 1% Senate bill content had passed, it would send a message around the world that all someone has to do is live here for a while and they’ll be given amnesty. No matter how it was spun stateside, everyone around the world would see it as amnesty, and come running.
Plus, there’d be a huge increase in legal immigrants, and a very large percentage of those would be low-skilled workers.
So, together with a $7 minimum wage, you’d have a huge influx of low-wage workers. Hopefully some economist will weigh in on whether that’s as much of a disaster as it sounds like it would be.
OTOH, if many “liberals” opposed illegal immigration rather than supported it, it seems like wages would naturally rise. And, if there weren’t a ready supply of sweat shop workers, those who run sweat shops might be forced to innovate rather than being able to rely on cheap labor.
As for other “liberal” proposals such as universal healthcare, perhaps they’d stand a bit better chance of winning approval if everyone didn’t know that “liberals” would try to extend them to include anyone who can make it over the border.
Think about it for five hours or so and it’ll all become much clearer.
June 21st, 2006 at 5:13 am
Out of all the “good border reports,” Marc couldn’t find or provide one to link that is sympathetic to our citizens who want our laws and borders respected. I’m surprised that the multi-media report didn’t have a language option–with English being the second one.
A warning for Mexicans who want to enter this country illegally this summer: Don’t! There is too much danger of you being killed by the heat. There. They’ve been warned, so anyone who does it and suffers can only blame himself. I don’t feel guilty about anyone who gets hurt in the commission of a crime.
If the minimum wage actually worked for workers rather than politicians, then raising it once would be enough and you wouldn’t have to increase it repeatedly every few years. Anyone with half a brain knows that if you increase the wages of the lowest paid workers, then those who aren’t fired will soon find that the next level of workers will complain that they need more money, too, and that they deserve more money since they produce more than those who now get the same thing. This chain reaction moves along and up until all the workers settled back into their relative positons–adjusted for inflation, of course, which was driven by the artificial wage increase. Can anyone understand that? Please, please try. I’m tired of whining about minimum wage increases that do nothing for workers except get a bunch of them fired in the early stages.
Oh, also, minimum wages are for entry level and weren’t intended to be enough to support a family on one job. If you’re making minimun wages and have kids, then someone messed up and it was probably your own fault. Go get a job with a liberal who will pay you more.
If all the bleeding heart liberals are so concerned about people who break our laws and who then complain about not making high enough wages, then open up your own pockets and start your own missions below our border. Work to get honest politicians elected in Mexico, because that is the start of solving the problems with their economy and stopping illegal border crossings. And, since Mexican politicians try to interfere in our elections and politics, it must be okay for you to do it to them. Just leave me out of it.
For once, the Repubulicans did the right thing on immigration. They just need to go further and slam that border door shut once and for all.
Doesn’t Mexico have some oil that we can use? I’m ready for them to start giving it to us for all that we’ve done to absorb their poverty problems.
Finally, how many Americans will suffer or die from crime by illegal immigrants or go jobless because their work was cut out from under them by the illegals? Didn’t think of that? Deny it? Sure. You feel good about helping someone–AS LONG AS SOMEONE ELSE PAYS FOR IT AND YOU DON’T HAVE TO SEE IT.
Now, I’ve wasted another ten minutes of my life.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:22 am
The bottomline: Republicans employ propaganda tactics to obscure the truth. A lie where I come from. I wont listen to them. Only fools believe this stuff.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:27 am
“Now, I’ve wasted another ten minutes of my life.”
and ours.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:44 am
“Now, I’ve wasted another ten minutes of my life.â€
It’s about time because the policies are
worlds apart. Progressive victories and no national debt: or war and red ink. The choice is evident.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:45 am
Michael Balter, if it took you the same amount of time to read my comment as it took me to write it, then you are wasting your time.
However, I never considered it a waste of time to read what other people think–especially if they have differing views. That’s how people learn, but those who consider that a waste of time already think that they know everything and don’t care to learn–which makes us different.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:55 am
Woody – it’s a free country and you have every right to your opinions on immigration – lord knows I’ve had bones to pick with Marc on this one – but do the folks here one small favor and don’t ever again invoke your “Christianity” in the wake of the attitudes you’ve put on display above.
Also – and, frankly, reading this was amazing – given your line “if the minimum wage actually worked for workers rather than politicians, then raising it once would be enough and you wouldn’t have to increase it repeatedly every few years”, I guess your suggestion would also apply to whatever it is you’ve charged per hour for your services over the last twenty or so years. RIght ? I’ve never heard even the dumbest wingnut assert that inflation is driven by people who are paid the least before. Are you really an “accountant” ?)
Short Version of this comment: You’re a moronic hypocrite. (Wanted to make sure Samuel Stott can respond effectively.)
June 21st, 2006 at 6:58 am
“However, I never considered it a waste of time to read what other people think–”
LOL. Perhaps there would be a future in interrogation on immigation for such a qualified individual? You know these tedious viginettes are digging deep for pity. If true it’s deplorable but I have a hard time drawing ultimate conclusions from these stories. Woody wants us to though.
June 21st, 2006 at 7:11 am
The compromise on Woody is a quick skim, if you know what a knee jerk reactionary posisition based on the megadittos of bad informantion is, there is little reason to prolong the misspent time.
At least Marc Cooper does not try to reduce the complex immigration problem to rants about THE BLOOD ON BILL CLINTON’S EVIL HANDS, or some such nonsense. Finally, it should be noted, what Woody says is relevant. The mania to portray every problem as perverse injustice being imposed on the poor widdo reactionary right is now the main roadblock to getting ANYTHING done.
The bizarre obsession with the word “Amnesty” surely must go back to Jimmy Carter letting the draft dodgers back in the country (at the time the right had, mostly, to hold it’s tounge, due to the striking get out of jail free card Ford had just handed Nixon) in an attempt to heal the wounds of Vietnam. It seemed to be working, for awhile, until the right learned they could use those wounds politicaly.
Anyway, I guess this Great Wall of Texas is to be built with more Chinese money, since the the thirst to lay out four billion a month in Iraq shows no signs of easying. And with Tax cuts for the master economic race made perminant, them socail programs will have to go. Ah, Marc, show me another link about the hopeless Dems, those Nadarites sure can write.
June 21st, 2006 at 7:27 am
“The compromise on Woody is a quick skim, if you know what a knee jerk reactionary posisition based on the megadittos of bad informantion is, there is little reason to prolong the misspent time. ”
There is no comprimise in my community. The only ones debating are the reactionary wingers dogmatists who simply want affirmation of their beliefs. What they have is not true. Based on what we know it’s fiction.
June 21st, 2006 at 7:30 am
Incidentally, the minimum wage, adjusted for inflation, is about 20% lower today than it was in 1961. (Woody – the knowledgable numbers guy – is going to tell me that proves his “theory” that, you know, the “escalation “of wages at the bottom of the labor market has created an inflation spiral. Just wait and see. Because he won’t back down from even his wildest assertions, no matter how unfounded. He doesn’t have the balls to do that.)
June 21st, 2006 at 7:33 am
How come no wants to let the voters decide on immigration policy with a special proposition vote in November? Make sure that all voters are legal residents before being allowed to vote. Ballots should be in English only with the yes/no box randomly positioned (in california anyone with an envelope with an address on it can register). Need to put a purple ink mark (aka Iraq) on each voter so they dont do multiple votes.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:15 am
Anyone with half a brain knows that if you increase the wages of the lowest paid workers, then those who aren’t fired will soon find that the next level of workers will complain that they need more money, too, and that they deserve more money since they produce more than those who now get the same thing
Those of us with an entire brain know that’s bullshit.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:21 am
reg et al, the problem with interpreting and extending what I say is that you frequently get it wrong. Read a little more carefully and apply a little more logic. But, if I find that I got something wrong myself, I’ll admit it.
Increasing minimum wage laws is a factor, not the only factor, in inflation. By increasing the lowest wage, you push all of them up, which fuels inflation. Pushing up gas prices does the same thing. When economic resources used in production increase in cost, then prices go up for the products that are created from those resouces. In the end, people lose jobs, there is no relative gain in the job market, and things cost more–which further hurts everyone, particularly fixed income people. Finally, in just catching your last comment, the minimum wages today compared to another hand-picked period of the distant past aren’t even relevant. The day that an increase is passed, the wages will be 10% or so higher on the immediate effective date. That’s relevant, and that’s when the upward price cycle starts again. Also, I’m an accountant, not an economist (there is a difference), but I understand econmics to this extent and better than liberals who think that there is an endless supply of other people’s money.
On your personal assertion, one difference between what I charge and what minimum wage laws demand is that people don’t have to pay my fees if they don’t want to–by choice; but, they have to pay the higher wages–by law. In my case, they think it’s worth it. In the other case, they often don’t, so they end up firing someone or hiring Mexicans.
reg, I certainly don’t think that you are qualified to judge whether or not someone is a Christian and you certainly have no right to demand or expect Christians to shut up if they fail or simply fail to meet your unusual standards. From Billy Graham to Pat Robertson, preachers make mistakes and sometimes say things that are wrong. But, they say a lot that is right, they help a lot of people, and they feel a spiritual duty to spread a message of salvation. You would like to shut them up. That is more dangerous and wrong.
On my above comments specifically, I was quite kind. I asked people to not break the law. I warned them of dangers if they did. I encouraged people with a passion to go to their favored mission field to help and to open their purses. I warned of perils in artificially tampering with basic economic laws and the bad effects that can have on the poor. Then, I suggested that people who have received help can then offer something back when able. Finally, I tried to open eyes to the fact that there are consequences for bad decisions and to consider everyone before demanding changes in laws. As for me, I’ll pick my own charities and missions. If I ever decide to help the prison ministries, then I might be able to help a lot of you and your kin.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:31 am
I don’t think immigration reform is dead — I think the House bill of enforcement first, mostly, is going to pass.
Too many Reps are afraid their base won’t vote for them if they don’t pass something, and they want to stay the majority party in the House.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:34 am
LCdAC, what happens if you do twice the work as someone else but they get a raise to the same amount that you make? You better believe that you will be in the boss’s office demanding more yourself or putting out resumes. If the boss sees that he can’t afford to pay everyone more, then he’ll get rid of the least productive who are artificially earning the same as better workers. Ignoring the law of supply and demand works only a little better than ignoring the law of gravity. But, feel free to test that theory from any high place.
As this relates to illegal immigration, Mexican workers keep down the wages of other workers by flooding the market with cheap labor (which usually operates as an underground economy with no reporting of wages, and with no taxes paid, although many want us to believe othewise.)
Maybe you use your entire brain, but I suspect that you probably sit on it more often.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:38 am
Of course some employers do pay higher wages as incentive based on demand, so why is this not a problem? The slippery slope argument fails going uphill. It works real well the other way with gravity. Wages are declining, not increasing, with ridiculous prices for goods and services as it stands.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:42 am
The worker that gets twice as much production is a candidate for a promotion. If not he can move on. Lack of promotion is also a lack of incentive to produce. Minimum wage has no bearing on this business model.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:54 am
“The slippery slope argument fails going uphill. It ” ????????
Economists have studied the job-destroying features of a higher minimum wage. Estimates of the job losses of raising the minimum wage have ranged from 625,000 to 100,000 lost jobs. It is important to recognize that the jobs lost are mainly entry-level jobs. By destroying entry-level jobs, a higher minimum wage harms the lifetime earnings prospects of low-skilled workers.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:00 am
I’ve been convinced by the above arguments. I have decided we should freeze or abolish the minimum wage. Salary, even starting stalary, should be determined only by productivity. By the same logic, I am also now coming out against the 40 hour work week. Why limit employers in such an arbitray way? Workers should be asked to work as many hours per week as necessary to complete their tasks. The more productive workers will accomplish their jobs in shorter periods and will be able to retain their jobs. Less productive workers will tire and weed themselves out. While we are at it, let’s review all the other brakes on employment growth: like safety standards, environmental regulations, anti-discrimination laws etc etc,
Sometimes I wonder in what fucking world some of you folks live in.
What I don’t have to wonder about is how severe delusion knows no ideological bounds. The faith that some conservatives have in the market place is identical and as illusory as the faith that Communists had in “the dialectic of history.”
P.S. Woody… as to my selection of immigration pieces, well, they are MY selection. My assumption is that anyone computer-literate enough to read this blog is also capable of clicking onto a million other sites where he or she is free to read whatever contrasting view that gets their ya-yas off and reconfirms their world view: like Mexicans are responsible for crime, rape, traffic jams, meth explosions, tuberculosis and the general decline that all is dear and near in Western Civilization.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:04 am
Publius:
you regularly dismiss points made by others by quoting some fallacy in logic, which is mainly academic and often subjective. That common retort, in itself, seems to be an attempt to avoid the real issues. If you have no points to make, say so. If you have something useful to add, then do it.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:13 am
Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Slightly over half of workers earning $5.15 or less were under age 25, and about one-fourth were age 16-19. Among teenagers, about 10 percent earned $5.15 or less. About 2 percent of workers age 25 and over earned the minimum wage or less. However, among those age 65 and over, the proportion was 4 percent.
Above is fact not liberal whining.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:17 am
If the boss sees that he can’t afford to pay everyone more, then he’ll get rid of the least productive who are artificially earning the same as better workers.
Or as wages are another expense, he goes out of business as he cannot remain competitive, if he’s a shitty businessman and barely gets by anyway.
On the other hand, if he’s creative and a good businessman, he seeks to expand his business, and realizing that wages are also a competitive expense, he seeks to get the best and most productive employees, does his best to retain them, including giving them wage increases and realizing that they are an important investment in his business.
That’s what it means to have an entire brain.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:46 am
LCsAC, employers are already doing those things, and a higher artificial wage hike squeezes him. If he has no further production capacity or capital to expand, he has to take it out of profits, if there are any. What makes you think that he has any additional capacity or profit margin to pay people more just because the government says that he has to? Maybe we should do what Marc says and do away with the 40-hour work week and time-and-a-half overtime. It’s not likely that you’ve ever had to meet a payroll.
==========
Marc, actually, the primary point of my comment on your selections is that I highly suspect that you had NO reports favorable to closing the borders as opposed to being sympathetic to the illegals. That’s as much as statement on the training and the product of today’s ideologically left journalists than your personal choices. You can’t choose from what isn’t there. Maybe if we raised the minimum salaries for journalists, we could attract a higher caliber group and more conservatives.
On market forces, I am not in favor of nor have ever pushed for pure capitalism. But, labor and management should be able to work out acceptable working terms between them without the government imposing artificial, unrealistic, and often times silly rules. I’m for worker safety, but my life has not been made better or safer because OSHA made employers install split toilet seats. On the dollar side, minimum wage laws work as political issues for votes–not economic ones, as the market place will equalize everything, but at a higher level.
I appreciate your insight and conclusions on economic matters, but neither you, I, nor anyone else that I’ve read on this site knows enough to be considered an expert–and, sometimes I wonder about the (liberal) experts. Your experience and training is as a journalist, and I didn’t see macro- and micro-economics courses as being required to get a degree in that field. Your world of economics is different from mine, but mine would work better for everyone if the government limited its involvement.
(Do you stop work after 40 hours a week? I don’t either.)
June 21st, 2006 at 10:47 am
I gotta get to work, or I’ll have to put in more overtime. That’s it for the day.
June 21st, 2006 at 11:04 am
Yippee!
June 21st, 2006 at 11:24 am
So Marc, you no longer believe in historical/dialectical materialism? Do you now subscribe to the “great man” theory? Of course plenty of nonsense has been justified by dialectical thinking, but it seems to many if not most serious historians, even military historians, to be the best explanator/scholastic method of understanding the past, present and future.
What method of analysis do you now use (and don’t cop out and say “my two eyes” or some such)
June 21st, 2006 at 12:29 pm
“That’s as much as statement on the training and the product of today’s ideologically left journalists than your personal choices.”
Well this is opinion journalism not reporting. He doesn’t have to pick a wild right wing extreme to falsely balance the equation since we know his position and theirs. Most ideologues don’t know editorial from news. This comment is more evidence of that aspect.
June 21st, 2006 at 12:32 pm
“and I didn’t see macro- and micro-economics courses as being required to get a degree in that field”
I guess you’ve never been to college becaus ethis is freshman general education stuff required for any degree at a public university. repeating this ignorance won’t make it true. Ever, and it isn’t on its face.
June 21st, 2006 at 12:39 pm
“Anyone with half a brain knows that if you increase the wages of the lowest paid workers, then those who aren’t fired will soon find that the next level of workers will complain that they need more money, too, and that they deserve more money since they produce more than those who now get the same thing. ”
The poor bosses have no choice but to accede to the demands of these “more productive” employees. “If the janitor is making a little more, then so should the account executive,” surmises the Big Boss. “Why, fair is fair.” It’s a good thing we have Republicans to prevent an increase in minimum wage; othewise, we’d have wild inflation as workers marched into their bosses’ offices and demanded their fair share (relative to others who have nothing to do with them).
Also, Steven H., facts are marvelous things, but they are often disputed: http://www.cepr.net/publications/labor_markets_2005_05.pdf If it turns out, as this article argues, that many Americans at prime wage-earning age are stuck in minimum wage jobs would you consider a minimum wage increase? Or is the age thing just another gambit to try and mollify critics?
June 21st, 2006 at 12:40 pm
“Most ideologues don’t know editorial from news. This comment is more evidence of that aspect. ”
The pot said to the kettle.
June 21st, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Also Steven H’s assertions about job loss have been debunked when the “studies” were actually subjected to authentication. If anyone’s interested I can provide the links. But since he just pulled a comment out of his ass, I don’t feel any responsibility to supply extensive documentation. It exists and I’ve read it. This goes back to a much-touted study of the fast food industry in New Jersey done in the mid-nineties after a modest increase in the minimum wage and counter-analysis of the same and additioinal data by economists who weren’t working for a think tank sponsored by, duh, the fast food industry.
June 21st, 2006 at 1:21 pm
Ah, nice. Kevin Drum just did the work.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/
Post at 1:26pm on….The Minimum Wage
June 21st, 2006 at 1:25 pm
It’s funny, that seems to be the case with their “studies” no matter what the subject. Definitely faith-based, but on a false premise every time. Fallacious is as fallacious does.
June 21st, 2006 at 1:28 pm
Have any more cliches chadster? Anyone who’s studied the news business is well-aware of this division of labor, except those where there is no division, a new direction taken by the Washington Times and FOX News.
June 21st, 2006 at 2:37 pm
The Death of Immigration Reform…
At least for now. How much do we pay members of Congress to act like little children, picking up their toys and running home when things don’t go their way?…
June 21st, 2006 at 2:40 pm
If you have listened to the recent debates in, you’d think thousands of families are struggling to get by on minimum-wage salaries. That just isn’t the case, as several studies have shown. But it hasn’t stopped legislators from saying they have to do something to help “the poor†as they attempt to raise the minimum wage to the highest level in the country.
The fact is that most of the people earning minimum wage are gas pump jockeys and supermarket baggers and summer park and rec kids. In other words, they are teenagers earning money for the first time and the state’s minimum wage of $6.75 per hour is a nice pocket full of change for them.
It is rare for the head of a household to be making such a wage — and if he or she is, then there are a whole host of other benefits available so this family doesn’t fall through the cracks, according to the Washington-based Employment Policies Institute..
What a higher minimum wage does do is cost consumers more — whom do you think the higher costs are passed on to? More important, higher wages actually cost jobs because business owners can’t justify paying $8.25 per hour (what the state Senate is demanding) to someone to sweep a warehouse floor. So instead of four workers, a foreman might hire just three — or even two.
There has been serious debate over the years over whether the government should be setting any minimum wage at all. Let the market determine what wages should be, critics say. There have been several summers in recent years when businesses such as fast-food restaurants had to raise their wages far above minimum wage — and pay bonuses, as well — because they couldn’t attract enough workers.
The federal minimum wage is $5.15 per hour, although Sen. Edward Kennedy is calling for it to be raised to $7.25. That won’t go over well in low-wage states in the South, where houses cost half what they do up North It still isn’t even close to the $8.25 that the some want — and remember, it’s time and a half on Sundays and holidays, giving teenagers more money than they ever dreamed possible. No wonder so many of them have fond memories of their youth.
June 21st, 2006 at 3:27 pm
Rob – go read the Kevin Drum link I put up and follow his internal links through. You really need to educate yourself on the question of the minimum wage vs. jobs. As for “costing consumers more” – so the fuck what ? I’d gladly pay more for a head of lettuce if it meant farmworkers could live a decent life for all of their hard work. I’m embarrassed to save pennies at the expense of “the least among us.” The minimum wage has – in real terms – been sliding further and further down. Anyone who thinks raising it to, say, 1961 levels (in constant dollars) is some sort of radical scheme to destroy the economy and reward sloth needs – as Marc suggests – a reality check. Also when was the last time you saw a “gas pump jockey”. Also, where I live, “supermarket baggers” (checkers, etc.) are paid well above the minimum wage because most of them are unionized – and I’m damned glad of it. Means I can look them in the eye.
Oh yeah – the “Washington-based Employment Policies Institute” is one of several front groups created by Berman & Co., a Washington, DC public affairs firm owned by Rick Berman, who lobbies for the restaurant, hotel, alcoholic beverage and tobacco industries. Restaurant magnate Norman Brinker has served as chairman of EPI. Brinker is the chairman and CEO of Brinker International. He is also the founder of the Steak and Ale restaurant chain, a former chairman of Burger King, and past President of the Pillsbury restaurant group (all of which are either former employers of Rick Berman or clients of Berman & Co.). Chris Sullivan, president and founder of Outback Steakhouses has served as chairman of EPI. According to an article in the New York Observer, Outback Steakhouses political aciton committee is a major sponser of the EPI. The Employment Policies Institute was launched in 1991, around the time of the economic recession that led to the electoral defeat of then-president George Bush. EPI deliberately attempted to create confusion in the eyes of journalists and the general public by adopting a name which closely resembles the Economic Policy Institute, a much older, progressive think tank with ties to organized labor. In addition to imitating the name and acronym of the Economic Policy Institute, Berman’s outfit even used the same typeface for its logo. In reality, the two groups have dramatically different public policy agendas… (from Center for Media and Democracy)
June 21st, 2006 at 3:30 pm
The Employment Policies Institue is also the source of the study I referred to earlier that’s been substantially debunked, but keeps turning up as “evidence” for the kind of assertions about the minimum wage “destroying jobs” we’ve been treated to here.
June 21st, 2006 at 3:36 pm
Apologies to Tom Grey and Samuel Stott for not including extensive profanity or multiple “morons” in those last posts. You’ll just have to deal with the evidence – although I know how much easier it is for you to make a great show of self-righteousness while sticking pins in your “reg” Voodoo Dolls.
June 21st, 2006 at 4:53 pm
reg there’s always a page like that that never goes away. There’s nutball site supposedly debunking global warming written on one of the those childlike notbbook web pages that someone trots out as proof. It’s bogus like all these partisan studies. Facts operate separatly from ideology. That’s these folks don’t get. They need to catch a ride on the cluetrain.
June 21st, 2006 at 4:57 pm
As to the supermarket baggers, yes they’re union get benefits, and you’ll notice it doesn’t make food cost more here in Cailfornia because of it. But then in Georgia they make the minimum wage; any of those right to work states really.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:59 pm
“I don’t feel guilty about anyone who gets hurt in the commission of a crime.”
Looking for work is a crime?
Americans are funny that way. When they go to other countries, they have no issues with breaking laws to work, ask anyone who has seen what American “english teachers’ do in Asia. But the horrors of someone coming up from Mexico ‘committing the crime’ of looking for work “illegally”.
Of course, Woody has no desire to submit employers of “illegals” to intense suffering. All part of the relativist approach to dealing with immigration issues.
June 21st, 2006 at 7:02 pm
“As this relates to illegal immigration, Mexican workers keep down the wages of other workers by flooding the market with cheap labor”
Pretty lousy theory there Woody. American workers’ wages have been declining since the 1970’s. Your ‘blame the Mexicans’ approach is pretty black and white and dead wrong as a result.
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:31 am
Hey There,
My name is Karen Shacham and I work with CNN Pipeline in Atlanta.
I thought you might be interested to know that CNN Pipeline will be featuring House Speaker Dennis Hastert outlining his plan for the upcoming July hearings on immigration. This news conference will be LIVE on CNN Pipeline today at 2:15PM.
CNN Pipeline is an online, commercial-free, multiple live-news feed. It showcases four simultaneous news feeds from around the world and an on-demand function that allows you to select from a variety of news stories.
Please let your members know that they can go to http://www.cnn.com and click on the CNN Pipeline link to watch it *live* and get a two week free trial.
Thanks,
Karen
June 22nd, 2006 at 10:06 am
This is an incredibly long post, but I felt it was justified.
Woody stands for the epithome of rightwing conservative ignorance. And this is getting just too much. WHO said that nobody cares about American citizens? It’s just your constant victimization that’s fooling you. It’s a delusion. Everybody agrees on border encforcement for crying out loud. It’s just the “moral” Republicans who suffer from compassion constipation.
They’re so incredibly ignorant (which is fine), but it gets poisonous when you add their self-righteousness on top of it. The same can be said about other ideologues, but rarely when death is at stake. Look what caught Woody’s attention while Marc talked about dying Mexicans. His sense of self-pity is clearly stronger.
His simplistic world view is pathetic. To say something like “put up a warning sign that sais you will die if you cross the heated desert”, “ta-taa”, then if that doesn’t work, it’s their fault if they die You’ve got to be stupid to reason like that.
I guess, duh, why haven’t we thought of this conservative genius idea around the world before! Why haven’t we put up warning signs along North-Africa’s Gibraltar border, or for North-Koreans fleeing their opressive government? Woody, you’re so smart, as a dedicated conservative with a proclaimed moral view on morality, that they should hire you and your friends.
Do it like this: In North-Korea: Put up signs that read like this: “Dear border crosser, be aware that your regime may kill you on the spot if they find you escaping”, that should deter them all, or if it doesn’t, those North-Korean must be stupid. Sure, in the rightwing fool’s mind it really is that simple, as they make it.
For African illegals, including illegal immigrants from places like Darfur and Kongo, set up signs across the African deserts (to honor the “poor” European Westerners who might have to harbor them within their borders later on, God forbid, they might starve..) that read like this: “Dear fleeing African, be aware that attempting to cross the Gibraltan sea yeilds a high degree of death risk, so now you know!”, then it’s no-one but THEIR own fault if they still dare to cross and happen to drown. Mercyless pig.
The Woodys and the Ann Coulters come and smugly claim some moral high-ground on life which is so absurd that it defies description.
Woody and his rightwing bullshit morality that has no bearings on reality’s circumstances. It’s just words. If death doesn’t conjure a sense of moral duty than what the hell does, or justifiably can.
The House Republicans represent Woodies. In their thick minds there is no room for anything tangible, only theoretical rules.
I just wonder how people can live entire lives and remain on that intellectually isolated level. I’d be something fascinating if the consequenses weren’t real.
The same herd that stands firm in the face of bloodshed in Iraq, and are quick to reaffirm their righteousness (even morally so) in being there, despite THAT nation being sovereign as well (and THEY HAVE EXCUSES FOR ATTACKING AND INVADING OTHERS!!! APPARENTLY COMING FOR WORK IS IMMORAL!! God damn dumbasses!!!) are the ones who sit here at home going ” cry oh-my, why should we, pity-oh-pity, have to suffer so terribly from the devilish illegals who come here and work, at least they die in the desert. I’m a legal and didn’t die; it’s unfair “. It truly can’t get much worse than this unless you look at actual despots and their regimes.
Before something is done about illegals it’d be a good idea to be candid about whom the bulk of them are, and stop the hypocritical pretension about them being some evil thugs. Some are gangbangers, and criminals, but most aren’t. You cannot despise people who are innocent unless something is seriously wrong with yourself. And most illegals are innocent. Breaking a law doesn’t automatically make a person morally guilty. Laws without morals are worthless, for example as legal slavery was.
To Woody and his ilk, it’s apparently not bad enough that people die. It just tells it all. God forbid these fools leading this great nation any longer because their conceptions of reality don’t level with real life. They seriously have no clue, that’s why they utter their stone-age comments with such confidence–they simply don’t know better. It’s detrimental to survival to have such ignorance at the forefront. How many illegal bashers want to invade Iran now? I mean, this mindset is suicide.
There is no argue about this. When your near or dear, dies, THEN come back and speak with that conceited cockyness, you…Son of, serously, you and you idol Ann speak against people who’re experiencing true pain, not the perceived pain you whiny asses cry over, like offending the president and other snobbish luxury issues. You clearly can’t relate to what real pain is or means as of yet. One writes a book mocking grieving widows, and the other fools cheers her cynical achievement. Then they go holding hands horraying for the war indulged in a narcissistic sentimentality over others’ deaths. That’s what’s not fiction.
Woody hasn’t figured out yet that death is worse than everything else. You’ve got to be dumb to not see that gasoline is useless without a vehicle to use it with. And they’re so many, like, half the Congress is packed with these stiff-minded ignoramuses. Their sense of justice is worse than a dog’s. A dog has principles of when to bite v.s when not to. These people are like a malignant cancer in that they attack criss-cross, on a volatile basis. They have no core principles. Woody’s deepest principle is that of the written law (obviously, it even trumps human death). The implications of that are terrible. It means that a person’s values changes at the whims of a law book. If slavery became legal, they might defend it.
And they think it’s about being “bleeding-hearts”, ignorant seriously mental cases. They believe being human is “corny”. One only wishes Woody to be forced to the front-line and taste the blood himself. These apes talk a tough talk. If Woody wouldn’t cry if he lost someone near and dear, then he’d be a full-fledged psychopath. Otherwise he’d be exactly what he sees in others today, a “bleeding-heart” (another cheap cliche for the nonthinking yet condescending drools). Woody, you think you’re tough huh? I can attest that you’re not. You’re just a repressed looney. Marc is miles ahead of you in brave action. As illegals are becoming the Jew of the past in status, it takes bravery to display compassion toward them in public. You’re just a chest pounding monkey amidst the herd.
The more you learn about illegals other than drug smugglers or hardened criminals you’ll learn how utterly silly you people sound.
June 22nd, 2006 at 10:31 am
And Woody, yeah, More conservatives (smarter, like Limbaugh, or Coulter??). We should bring on the Talibans, Hamas. Fool! If we let liberal people take over the Middle East we might get peace! We might get peace instead of more chauvinism and vengeance!!
The more conservative the more dumb, frankly. Conservative translates into fears and a refusal to grow. Without liberal minded people there would’ve been no Renaissance, but dark-ages would still prevail. All human evolution means human proggression, not conservatism. Most greats in history were liberals (not ideologically, but mind-wise). Socrates, Beethoven, Einstein, Adam Smith, Picasso, the Beatles, Steven Spielberg, Terrentino, it just goes hand in hand. You can’t zip your mind and think you’re still moving forward. So let’s not get too cocky here, OK?
And the same thing goes today. Global warming, gay-marriage, stem-cell research, issues essential for the well-being of most humans, just like women’s equality and other things were before, are being held back by self-entitled conservatives. If the Woodies were to dominate, we’d be stuck in the medivals, And that was a sick society, even though the religious crusaders would’ve claimed otherwise.
Sure, some greats have leaned conservatively. But not to the explicit point that you see our nation’s movement do, where they basically go out publicly and brag about being repressed.
And some call themselves conservatives, but aren’t really. They’re just really good people who define themselves that way. It doesn’t matter in the end, labels are just lables. The label factories are those like the pundits.
At least when I use the term conservative, I’ve something explicit in mind. I don’t just bundle together the rest of the world into some lump based on their dissent with my views, like they do everyday, even in books.
June 22nd, 2006 at 1:08 pm
The other day I had a flat tire and, being disabled, couldn’t change it myself. So I called Auto Club to come out and while waiting for them one car stopped. It was a guy flying the Mexican flag (guess he was a World Cup Fan of the Mexican Team) and he asked, in halting English, if I needed help. Just then the AAA arrived and I thanked my Latino Good Samaritan.
That’s the troube with these Mexicans. They won’t learn American!
All the immigration reform laws in the world are useless if they are not enforced and we all know that the chance of real crakdowns on the hiring of illegal immigrant labor by employers is a pipe dream. Hell its even in TV series. On HBO’s “Big Love” the patriarch (Harry Dean Stanton) tells his people to stop listening to the workers in his mine asking for health benefits and just call the INS. Why not? No penalties. And nothing will change until we get rid of the legalized bribery called campaign finance. But that is too much “Mego” for most people so we’ll just bitch and moan about it instead.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:20 pm
UpTheAnte is of the mind that he can pick and choose the laws he wishes to obey, based upon his personal sense of morality. Which universal book of morality are you well versed in, Up The Ante? There are cultures outside this continent where stealing isn’t considered a crime. Based upon Up The’s point of view, foreigners should be able to violate our our laws with impunity, by substituting their sense of morality for ours. I’m afraid that Mexicans are finding it dangerous to substitute their frame of reference to justify their acts. This must be so, however, as millions of Mexicans are using forged documents to gain jobs in this country. Isn’t that a felony? From the citizen’s point of view, the one that counts, they are committing felonies and are subject to imprisonment. Would Up The consider forgiving a U.S. citizen for the same crime, or should we give them amensty, as the Senate bill would do. Up The is walking a dangerous path when he asserts that one can use their own judgement when the law is concerned. I find his references to slavery amusing, as they are so irrelevent to the current situation.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:26 pm
It would seem that the argument for an increase in the minimum wage is moot, as low skill job applicant citizens are already competing with illegal aliens in the race to the bottom. Without a fenced and controlled border, legislation for higher minimum wages is just so much hot air.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:47 pm
UpThe’s words of wisdom concerning crime and illegal immigration ignores the fact that most working illegal immigrants do commit felonies when they use forged documents to gain jobs and social services they are not entitled to. This is one UpThe’s choose from column B if it doesn’t suit your moral code. Mexicans should be compelled to follow the law without regard to their perspective.
As to death in the desert: Marc Cooper and UpThe and many other liberals, inluding Cardinal Mahoney and Robin Hoover insult Mexicans patronizing them. The Mexicans already have a patrone, their government. UpThe and Marc should take their case to Vincente Foxe, as he could easily prevent those deaths. Let Marc make a trip to Mexico City and ask Vincente why he fails to take action. If Mexico stops the traffic, it won’t be necessary to build a fence.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:43 am
George. You seem to not get it.
Regardless of how much you paint out illegal immigration as a “crime” issue, it first and foremost isn’t an issue crime crime. That’s just ignorance to claim, has always been, and always will be.
Crime implies criminal intention. People looking for work obviously have noble intentions as they deliberately seek jobs, not banks to rob.
We can turn the page over and ask “If we were morally righteous to lay claim on this land we now call the United States of America, would you also excuse of Mexicans came here armed and try to lay claim on this land”? Oh, why not? But of course you wouldn’t. Reality is just more complex than all these trumpeting law pseudo chamipioins may be ready to accept. And so they keep arguing from the same narrow standpoint of laws over and over.
Note then also that laws need to match the dynamics of reality.
Otherwise they become littler more than symbols of private sentiments.
I’ve said this before. When the Hurricane victims looted stores, they were rigthtfully excused for doing so, and there are so many parallells. You just keep judging actions without considering the circumstances behind them.
And as for illegal immigration, you can call it felony this and misdemeanor that, morally speaking, it’s nothing to do with other common crimes whatsoever, because the main driving force behind illegal immigration isn’t a lack of conscience like many other crimes are, but plain survival. The survival insticnt you know. The law only has relevance so far. When much is at stake or desperation sets in, some laws Will be dodged, because nature itself is much stronger.
And you know it. You know that most illegals come here to work and provide for their families, not to harm people, yet you insist on painting it as an immoral issue, when it’s not, whatsoever.
What would be immoral from what you’re saying, would be to allow something to happen and continue to the point where others get harmed by it. Say, if illegal immigration was allowed to grow uncontrolled until say20 million citizens had lost their jobs, would be immoral by those who let it continue. But even that wouldn’t mean that the original action in and of itself was immoral. The issue is more practical than moral.
In Singapore it’s illegal to spit on sidewalks. So what, are you going to say that those who spit are immoral? Would mean to say that Jesus never spat? This is relative morality at its highest degree. And the issue isn’t even about excusing or pardoning illegal behavior. It’s to recognize the reality. The reality is that a big chunk of current illegal bashers would’ve done the same thing if they were in a different disposition from birth or in life in general. You could call lillegal immigration an atrocity if you wanted, but it wouldn’t change anything.
Again, illegal immigration is Not a criminal issue. The criminal aspect is secondary. It’s primarily a humanitarian issue. Crime implies criminal intention–illegal immigration on the whole is not criminal to intention. What more you know is that most illegals do want to abide by the law as much as they possibly can. They don’t steal, rob, harrass or molest once they’re here, right. So when you stubbornly hook on to the detail of them crossing illegally and pinpointing the criminal aspect of that, despite Marc and others trying to show Why it happens, one has to ask finally what rather your issue is.
And instead of asking “would you excuse all criminals?”. Why don’t you try and explain instead why an illegal refugee from Darfur is first and foremost a criminal being?
As for Viecente Fox dodging his responsibility. Well, he may, but that has no bearing on the everyday decision making of citizens with immediate needs. In theory they shoulda coulda and woulda, but crossing the desert is tough enough, and you’re not blind right, seeing that people obviously Do risk their lives. People don’t have time to wait for political turnovers, unless they feel it’s viable to care. Nor would you.
But yeah, in the long run Mexico better do something, like could be said about a huge amount of countries around the world. But what you’re doing is blaming the victims of failing governments. This sounds very ambigous. It’s as though you know on one hand that people have reasons to leave their countries illegally, but can’t at the same time stop blaming them for doing so. No wonder why the Congress is confused.
Both Mexico and the United States have a duty for these people. Mexico has dodged on its part, but so have the U.S by letting them root.
The self-proclaimed conservatives by the way, went to Iraq. They went to attack Iraq. Why didn’t THEY spend their energies on Mexico’s government instead of spewing lies about Iraq? Is it that Bush happens to not be that fiercly against illegal immigrants? But his voter base cheered him for Iraq, and now they blame him for what they didn’t prioritize themselves about immigration. This is really one knot after the other.
Also skip the ludicrous idiotic comment about “liberals”. I’m sick of it. I Never defined myself as a liberal until these sheep came around and labled me as one online. It’s stupid, for real. Be a man and judge individuals on their merits, without being a coward and lumping them together under some wholesale category. Like with immigration, reality is just not that simple.
Even though being liberal implies something open-minded, which is a good things mind you. And open mind is precisely what the Talibans and their ilks lack.
Oh, and regarding forged documents. That’s indeed a painful aspect of illegal immigration. But granted, most illegals would’ve rather come illegally and worked legally if they could, but most can’t which is another ludicrous pecularity of the current immigration debate, since that fact is being blatantly ignored.
But again our nation has ignored the problem for years. As for social services. Most illegals work, period. You fools sound like they go on masse begging for benefits which is a lie of the caliber that only the war lies could beat. The average illegal is afraid of deportation, and therefore shun governmental services in general, including those that provide reliefs. Not only that, but social security and most other major benefits are out of reach of non-legal residents. They on the other hand pay into social security and don’t get any return from it.
Regarding school and hospital services. That’s just a mandatory morality to let people have the basics when you actually let them stay and work their asses off, but without providing legal means for them to do so. It would be morally bizarre to let people work but penalize them if they got sick and needed help, or wanted to treat their kids with dignity and hope. Part of America has undoubtedly benefited from the illegal’s perspiration. You better admit it.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:48 am
excuse the spelling, it went to hell.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:29 am
Well, UpThe, if the millions of illegal Mexicans are granted amnesty, they will be elligible for all the benefits under discussion. Social Security and Medicare will soon be bankrupt, and adding millions of poor to the rolls will only make it occur sooner. Historically, the poorly eductated stay poor, and as such do not pay income taxes but receive it all back as refunds. Mexicans typically have large families, despite their income levels, making them eligible for Earned Income Tax Credit payments. Thus, they do not contribute to the tax base required to pay for schools, hospitals, the military and other government services. Moreover, the huge cost of maintaining a new immigration bureaucracy, estimated in the billions, makes them a further drain on our economy.
Many jobs that illegals do in factories could be done by automation, but this is discouraged as long as cheap labor is available.
Frankly, I do not care if they work hard or how much is contributed by illegal aliens to the bottom line of exploitive employers. They were not invited here by the average decent citizen, but by the unscrupulous, and I refuse to bear the burden of their presence.
More workplace enforcement is in order, and when that happens, most of the 12 million will be forced to go home.
From my perspective, the fools are the ones who overlook the great damage to our country done by illegal immigration (additional criminals over the ones we have already) and the potential damage that could be done by amnesty (costs). You advocates have the burden of defending the adoption of 10-12 million poor, and thus far you have failed miserably. To argue that it is the moral thing to do doesn’t cut it in my book.
——————————————————
Quoting UpThe: “Most illegals work, period. You fools sound like they go on masse begging for benefits which is a lie of the caliber that only the war lies could beat. The average illegal is afraid of deportation, and therefore shun governmental services in general, including those that provide reliefs. Not only that, but social security and most other major benefits are out of reach of non-legal residents. They on the other hand pay into social security and don’t get any return from it.
Regarding school and hospital services. That’s just a mandatory morality to let people have the basics when you actually let them stay and work their asses off, but without providing legal means for them to do so. It would be morally bizarre to let people work but penalize them if they got sick and needed help, or wanted to treat their kids with dignity and hope. Part of America has undoubtedly benefited from the illegal’s perspiration. You better admit it. “
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:58 am
Let’s see, the Senate passes Hagel/ Martinez in May so quickly that nobody in the Senate has a clue what the consequences of the stealth measures in the Bill will generate, Hmmmm.. maybe just may we need to take our time and do it right. My what an odd concept.
The one consequence that makes me want to hurl the most is the one concerning the generous Amnesty provision and Guestworker program (guest workers get to stay folks and become legal residence over time. They don’t have to go back). The amnesty provision allows a path to citizenship to at least ten million and as amny as twenty million illegal immigrants. The guest worker program will triple the number of legal immigrants allowed in this country every year. Add to that all their relatives including children, parents, and siblings, that will be permitted to come and you add it all together and within 20 years approx. 60 million legal immigrants will flow into this country. That is a low ball figure using 10 million illegals. There may be as many as 20 millions in this country right now. You think our roads and parks, and cites are crowed now? Just wait my friend. Our good friends in the senate when asked about the numbers generated, fessed up to not having a clue as to what their bill would do to the explosion in legal immigration.
I challenge anyone reading this to prove me wrong. Read the damn bill, all 600 plus pages of it.
How bout the largest increase in the welfare State in over 35 years. That is what the importation of massive poverty will do to this country.
How bout instate tuition to all “undocumented” immigrants while out of state American citizens pay thousands more sitting along side them in class.
How bout complete amnesty to all illegal immigrants who committed felonies by using fraudulent documents to gain employment in the US. If you or I as American citizens committed Identity Theft we would go to jail for crimes committed. Thousands upon thousands of Americans have has their identities stolen and there credit ruined by these actions. All that is forgiven completely. It’s in the bill, read it.
All employees hiring illegal immigrants will be given amnesty to those crimes. In the bill.
Should the legislation become law, the Department of Homeland Security will be allotted a whole ninety days to perform extensive background checks on more than ten, possibly twenty million illegal immigrants. This provision was included to reassure skeptical Americans that the government would be performing appropriate due diligence. Yea right, and lightning flies out of my butt every night at the bewitching hour to. The problem becomes apparent when pencil is put to paper. Performing background checks on ten million applicants in three months means investigating over one hundred thousand people per day (approximately 4,166 per hour), assuming the folks at Homeland Security don’t mind working nonstop. Insanity rules.
On and on and on and on…..America deserves to know the complete truth behind the Senate Bill. This kind of history defining legislation deserves our scrutiny. Our inept elected officials don’t have a clue what they passed. Shame shame!! The hearings will help educate the public who deserve to know the facts and the truth. Whats so wrong in that?
BTW. I am a life long card carrying Democrat. Just to be clear.
June 23rd, 2006 at 9:06 am
Amen, Netram. You and I couldn’t agree more. Anyone who doesn’t cry shame on the Senate has no idea of what’s in their bill. I believe that Marc Cooper is an honest man, butI have been sadly disappointed that he has never addressed the shameful aspects of the bill.
June 23rd, 2006 at 9:23 am
“How bout the largest increase in the welfare State in over 35 years. That is what the importation of massive poverty will do to this country.”
That’s so simplistic. Ya forget little things like the children of ‘illegals’ also end up buying new houses in the next generation or two…which economists who track the real estate market prospects think is a bright spot for the maintenance of American real estate values to come, even if the economy tanks…
But even putting aside little things like complexity, mass poverty is not caused by poor people. In fact it’s usually because poor people rise up in big numbers, like during the mass strike movements of the 30’s and 40’s or the Civil Rights Movement/Welfare Rights Movement of the late 60’s that we see real wages of American workers increasing for decades.
Organize immigrant workers, “legal” or “illegal” and the threat of poverty decreases. Also have a foreign policy that supports the rights of workers to organize unions in countries like Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua,…instead of supporting and arming governments that are hostile to unions. Duh.
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:28 am
Well moniqua,
Those teaching English illicitly are subject to punishment, more than I can say for the millions of illegals who cross our borders. Places like Korea actually enforce their laws. I find the comparison absurd, as those teachers aren’t likely to become social burdens to the country that their visiting, unlike our poor illegal Mexicans. Korea quickly deports people who violate their laws, while our we have a cumbersome due process that entails the sham called catch and release.
—————————————–
moniqua Says:
June 21st, 2006 at 6:59 pm
“I don’t feel guilty about anyone who gets hurt in the commission of a crime.â€
Looking for work is a crime?
Americans are funny that way. When they go to other countries, they have no issues with breaking laws to work, ask anyone who has seen what American “english teachers’ do in Asia. But the horrors of someone coming up from Mexico ‘committing the crime’ of looking for work “illegallyâ€.
Of course, Woody has no desire to submit employers of “illegals†to intense suffering. All part of the relativist approach to dealing with immigration issues.
June 23rd, 2006 at 11:00 am
[...] **Â The left side of the debate is realizing nothing is happening to change the immigration laws. Here is New West friend Marc Cooper with some incisive analysis and commentary. [...]
June 23rd, 2006 at 11:29 am
Marc Cooper seems to be opposed to the reasoned public discourse that was never accomplished before the Senate deliberations and vote. Everyone knows that Senate never had time to review the 600 pages or so that comprise the bill, yet the left cries foul when we move back to square one and do the right thing by doing so. I can only believe that the advocacy groups, Senate Democrats and Republicans complain so much because they will be embarrassed when the facts come to light. It will be no wonder to the rest of us when the public is up in arms when they realize that their Senate has betrayed them. Rational people like Cooper should have suspected foul play when our Senate hammered out a solution in the few weeks that they spent on the issue. Instead of opposing further debate, Marc Cooper should be giving kudos to the House of Representatives.
Ill considered legislation is far worse than no legislation at all. We’ve all seen too many government solutions with disastrous consequences to believe that such a complex problem as immigration could be fixed with legislation debated during such a short period of time. The failure of the 1986 immigration bill is only one example.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:23 pm
Its funny how people equate illegal immigration with being Mexican, but a few years back a friend of mine in San Francisco was dating an Irish boy who happened to be 1) illegally in the country after a tourist visa expired, and 2) employed in the construction industry where he estimated the majority of workers in SF were Irish and illegally in the country as well. Hmmmm, reality couldn’t be that complex, could it?
Stop hating on Mexicans. Ever been to Taco Bell Woody?
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:30 pm
With 10- 20 million or so illegal Mexicans in this country it makes it difficult not to equate illegal immigration with Mexico. How many illegal Irish live here?
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Did you see this, Marc?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800613.html?nav=rss_email/components?nav=slate
Apparently, whilst the administration says the immigration problem is a real and present danger, they’ve been quietly scaling back the enforcement of illegal-alien employer laws to near-zero. In the last six years it’s fallen like 95%. Check it out.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Jonathan, Marc should watch Lou Dobbs at CNN if he’s interested in the facts on the immigration problem. Unlike most media journalists who seem to focus on the plight of the poor illegal aliens (ad nauseum), and shamefully ignore the implications of amnesty and illegal immigration on the ordinary citizen, Lou Dobbs does a great job in bringing the truth to light, including your point.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Wondering,
Don’t you think that 10 – 20 million Americans crossing the border without going through the Mexican customs and immigration would cause some resentment in Mexico? Americans have every right to resent their illegal presence in this country. We’re no less human other Western nations who find themselves with an illegal immigrant problem. I’m just surprised that some our more radical elements in this country haven’t caused Mexicans more difficulty.
I can guarrantee that the less tolerant among us would be more aggressive to illegal aliens if we were in a recession. Can you imagine the social unrest caused if amnesty occurred in conjunction with an economic downturn, with citizens screaming at their Congressmen that they have to compete with millions of newly adopted Mexican poor, for jobs that they were told that they would not do? Does anyone really think that these substitutes for American workers could ever be sent home should this situation ever arise on the path to citizenship? It’s sad that we pit low cost illegal immigrants against citizens during this prosperous period. Pitting citizens against amnestied illegal aliens against each other in a recession would be tragic, indeed.
And what percentage of these illegal workers are nice to have around in good times and expendable in bad? It’s nice to have someone do your landscaping or clean you pool when times are good, but low skill labor is always the first to be dispensed with. No one really knows the stability of the illegal immigrants employment situation.
June 23rd, 2006 at 11:20 pm
George Williams:
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:29 am
Humans are more important than money. That’s something you’ve lost in life. You talk about illegals like they were disposable comodities, casually ignoring what it would mean on the humanitarian level to send 12 million people back to where many of them felt compelled to risk their lives to leave in the first place.
You’ve got no grasp of the scope of this, other than what you can speculate from an economic viewpoint, which even that are speculations that sound dramatically different depending on whom you ask. It’s not even about facts.
The melody goes like this; very simple. Those who don’t like illegals, or whose perception of illegals is negative, and regardless why, find a plethora of reasons for why illegals are bad for the country. Most statements appear to come from extreme organizations like the American Patrol and certain redneck House Republicans. I mean, where the hell are the facts. One fact for example that you rarely hear about is the billions, not millions, but billions of dollars that illegals have already paid into Social Security. You also never hear any suggestions of other good things they’ve done. You, like all the other mentally lazy, dismiss them as a sole burden, which you even dont’ know for sure, but worse don’t care. You say they dont’ pay into the military. Well, fuck that. Their sons FIGHT in the military . That’s a skewed perpsective. You can’t have money without life.
I’m still not suggesting that the issue is black or white. Some Americans have lost their jobs due to illegals. Some Americans have lost their lives due to criminals who were illegallly here. But on the whole, on the majority, what you also fail to recognize is the vigour and resource to be found in millions of people who have done something extraordinary to just get a job.
You have to recognize that people can be an asset in other ways than economically. I’d rather welcome 12 million honest, hard-working, and foremost well-meaning people, than be crude and kick them out based on economic presumptions.
I mean, after all you and your folks invaded Iraq for selfish reasons so you’re hardly better yourself in that regard. It’s not even a lack of verified facts regarding statements, but there’s this in-your-face doubble standard. Most House Republicans are as fiercly against an amnesty for illegals as they are passionately pro the war in Iraq. It’s just incredibly inconsistent stance, both morally and logically.
And yet, the Senate bill for instance, which favors a path toward citizenship for illegals, doesn’t even target all of estimated millions of illegals here, but is selective. It appears to not even be an option on the table to grant amnesty to all of the illegals who are here.
As for the scrupulous corporations you talk about who are the ones that hire illegals, as opposed to them being welcome by average citizens. Immigration is firstly a force that goes mighty beyond local politics. Illegal immigration will happen as long as there are economic imbalances in the world. You can’t treat immigration, legal or illegal, in the scope of your own local backyard. It just doesn’t match reality.
That’s why it’s common sense to legislate according to the broader picture, not try to suppress it forcibly like the dumb House Republicans attempt at doing. But we’ll get to that, the problem with them is that they don’t mind when others die.
Human value is not based upon income. Human value is absolute. You can’t replace it.
June 24th, 2006 at 5:43 am
You never address the potential damage that adopting 10 -20 milliion poor could have on this country, so I can only believe that you have no concern for the 300 million of your fellow citizens. I pity the poor citizens of our society that could very well find themselves in the competition with 20 million additional poor for scarce resources. The recent Senate bill could hardly be music to their ears. I pity you for you inability to comprehend the destruction that amnesty for illegal immigrants would bring.
June 24th, 2006 at 3:35 pm
For those of you arguing against whether illegals drive down wages, take away jobs from Americans or any other single-issue – you’re obfuscating the entire picture That’s exactly what Marc Cooper has done in every post on this topic. It isn’t just ONE thing, it’s the cumulative effect of EVERYTHING that illegal immigration costs this country. More specifically, illegal Mexican/Latin American immigration.
Whether you like to hear it or not, the facts are clear & documented: Hispanics have higher birthrates than any other ethnic immigrant groups. Hispanics do not assimilate as well as other group. Hispanics do not learn English as quickly and, in fact, resist learning because they feel they have a community of Spanish-speaking businesses and citizens already in place. Hispanics make up the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants and within that set is a subset that states they make up the overwhelming majority of unpaid visits to emergency rooms, particularly for childbirth. Hispanic illegal immigrants are overwhelmingly responsible for the financial collapse of several trauma centers and ER’s in southern California.
I don’t know how many of you live in California but if you did you would see what has happened here since 1986 – the year of the LAST great illegal amnesty. Our school system is ranked lower than Mississippi (the poorest state in the nation). If you were aware that 70% of all public school children are hispanic and that 60% of all public school children speak little to no English, the low ranking would be understandable. Our hospitals and schools are two of the most important basics in a community’s infrastructure and ours are in shambles and costing us billions of additional dollars just to keep them afloat. The main reason is the cost of illegals and their children. Add in the fact that 80% of illegals wages aren’t taxed and you have millions of people taking advantage of our services without contributing a dime to keep them running.
Unlike some who’ve posted here, I’m not a right winger. I am in face a lifelong Democrat. But I’m not an idiot. Every major economist has stated that we cannot keep taking in the number of illegals that we have in the past, especially those that have no skills, high birthrates and no English language capacity.
Maybe Marc Cooper doesn’t care what his country will look like in 10 years, but I do. No one would resent hispanics if it weren’t for the fact that – especially in the last few months – they have made it clear they have no interest in assimilating or joining our country, they are merely here to take what they can get and send most of it back to Mexico. Or perhaps Mr. Cooper isn’t aware the wages of illegals in the US are Mexico’s #1 revenue source? Maybe, Mr. Cooper, you should spend some of your energy in Mexico talking to its leaders & ask them why the hell they encourage their own citizenry to leave? Why aren’t they doing squat to improve their country? Why don’t they reimburse the US for what their citizens cost us? Don’t forget their enormous oil reserves they won’t let us touch.
We owe no apologies for wanting to take care of our own citizens first. If you think Mexicans are so much worse off that we should give them a break here, I welcome you to join me any day at the VA hospital where I volunteer. I will introduce you to homeless vets just back from Iraq, alongside their legless comrades. Or I can take you to my next trip to West Virginia or Mississippi where my church group and I go twice a year to assist poor children and single mothers who have few, if any, teeth due to malnutrition; persistent respitory problems from living in cold, damp, moldy housing. We have enough problems to take care of here. I don’t appreciate Mexico, Guatemala and El Salvdor exporting their problems to us, especially when their governments actually have the resources to take care of their people – but greedily refuse to do so. I also resent the hell out of any group coming to my country illegally then having the gall to DEMAND that I give them money, jobs, health care, education, etc all while they insult me by refusing to even attempt to learn English. By the way, your simplistic remark that we are “scared to hear Buenose Dias in a 7-11″ was exactly what’s wrong with the media today: oversimplifying a legitimate problem to make it fit your editorializing. You ought to be ashamed to call yourself a journalist, but then if you don’t, who will?
June 24th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
margonew,
You’re right on the mark. Unfortunately, journalism is this country has been brow-beaten to do the bidding of special interest groups. It is politically dangerous for journalists to actually take a balanced approach to reporting, especially in California. I have no doubt that newspapers and web bloggers have been co-opted by Hispanic advertisers. After all, newspaper media has been on the decline for years now, a weakness which has left it wide open for blackmail.
The Hispanic community is growing by leaps and bound in California, a fact not lost among the state’s policiticians. Rational thought in Southern California has been abandoned in favor of doing what is politically correct in the minds of Hispanic advocacy groups. Speak out against illegal immigration in LA and you’ll quickly find yourself ostricized and called a racist, no matter how true your point is.
June 24th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
I challenge the readers to find one newspaper pundit from each of the major Hispanic centers in the following states that has written a piece opposing illegal immigration. I’m willing to bet that you’ll only find articles concerning the plight of illegal immigrants, because the owners see their future in catering to the Hispanic population. Few have the courage to buck the trend.
Numbers indicate U.S. census ranking by population and percentage of households in each state that speak Spanish. Only top ten are shown.
1 New Mexico 28.2
1 Texas 28.2
3 California 27.0
4 Arizona 20.7
5 Florida 17.7
6 Nevada 17.4
7 New York 14.1
8 New Jersey 13.0
9 Illinois 11.9
June 24th, 2006 at 7:40 pm
George Williams.
Amnesty would cause destruction? What do you mean? Americans would suddenly start falling from bridges? Essentially what you and your pals are saying is that it’s a moral crime to treat illegals whov’e worked hard well. That’s what it boils down to.
I’d say with confidence that sending innocent 19-25 year olds into a dubious war is what truly hurts Americans. How come the same House Republicans don’t mention that as a sore for the American families but readily attack hapless migrants who’ve risked their lives in the desert to come here and work? Talk about not caring about people getting hurt, I mean those guys are the masters of it.
That latinos don’t assimilate is Bullshit with a big “B”. You morons keep reiterating the same prejudices that the Buchanans spew, when in fact they neither make sense nor are they supported by statistical evidence. So why keep spewing it? Because you hate the illegals, huh?
Where do you get your stupid ideas from? I don’t refute things based on a dislike for hearing a truth, but it simply is not true. Latinos including Mexicans, as supported by statistics, DO learn English, even FASTER than many other immigrants throughout history. It’s just intresting what can be said contrary to that. You state that they don’t “want” to assimilate. Are you psychics? Well, no wonder why immigration politics is going to hell.
Note that many Latinos have come recently. They’re our neighbours after all. It takes time to learn a new language (I mean, have you ever tried it?). And most free English classes throughout cities are filled with illegal applicants. You don’t learn much by listening exslusively to Buchanan-Tancredo-Am.Patrol. Period.
Moreover, by stating that, you imply that Mexicans and Latinos have some inherent inferiority etnically. You seem to believe that the motivation to learn is ethnically prompted, as opposed to humanly prompted as in it’s in the best interest for people to adjust and to learn, because they’re humans, not because they’re Brittons or Mexicans.
It’s cruel to say that about Latinos. It implies that they’re less than innocent, if not less capable.
I do NOT pretend that all illegals are angels. What I do care about is the truth. A truth is that when people risk their lives to find a job, that means something. To ignore it on the other hand would be legal, but morally despicable. The effect on people that an unfriendly immigration reform can have will be profound and can actually hurt people. They will be hurt for real, not according to some paranoia. Again, many have risked their lives to get here. Ask yourself what YOU would risk your life for, and then try and walk the walk for once, if you don’t get what it means.
As for an Amnesy hurting Americans. First off, steps can be taken to minimize or even possibly eliminate whatever hurting that could bring on citizens. But more importantly, by evidence (like you morons read Marc Cooper’s post, and still dont’ get anything), more illegals will get hurt by being forced out. More will be pushed into uncertainties, more will be split apart from their families, and more will die, period. You mean you’d rather see illegals die than to let them stay for work and be with their kids?
I know that some literally do.
Now the other thing is is that leaving illegals in a status quo, will hurt all people, including illegals and Americans, as it brings more instability, fraud, exploitation, tensions, and whatnot. Immmigration laws need to reflect Reality, not prejudice and beliefs. The reality is that deporting all illegals, or forcing them to leave would apart from being morally despicable, and low as can get, a slap in the face to that reality. The reality is that many companies need the illegal workers, because citizens won’t do the jobs, and that sometimes includes jobs with higher salaries. There’s proof of that.
The other point is that many illegals are willing to fill those spots, but have no means of doing so legally even if they want to. To just force a cap onto reality itself is irrational. Even if you despise people who lack a certain legal document , it would be irrational for you to ignore realitiy. There’s a practical side to the issue that pertains to all regardless of their personal or political stance. But you seem ignore that as well. For instance, even if you don’t give a damn about uprooting people, splitting up families, or deporting soldier’s parents, the economic reality still exists. By yelling “eeek, they’re illegal, kick them out!”, isn’t going to address that.
Again, the “damage” of “adopting 10-20 million”. They’re already here for god’s sake. What could possibly get worse? You mean it’s better to do the above and split up families and send soldier’s parents away??
And most of these people are not MS-13 members or felons. Most of them are just good folks that work hard, and because of that wouldn’t be big deal to let them stay. We’re not talking of 10-20 million slobs, but the opposite of hard workers who work for noble purposes. To kick all of them out for the sake of them being “illegal” would be irrational.
There’s more damage to be done by uprooting a healthy tree than to leave it in place, even if you personally don’t like the sight of it.
June 25th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
UpThe,
I’ll wait until the House hearings are over and we’ll see if Americans still want to adopt 20 million poor. You’re a lot of hot air and calling those who differ with you morons only exposes your character.
June 25th, 2006 at 2:41 pm
You haven’t been listening, UpThe. It can easily get worse, much worse if the 20 million and their families wind up on food stamps, Social Security and Medicare. I repeat again, the poor do not pay taxes, and they are the greatest users of the welfare entitlements and earned income tax credits. The poor are subsidized by taxpayers. Subsidizing 20 million poor and their sponsored immigrating family members is unacceptable to me and the rest of the sane taxpayers. As far as I’m concerned, these people are Mexicans and their welfare is the responsibility of the Mexican government, period, finito.
Their major contribution to the U.S. is to the bottom lines of their unscrupulous employers. I don’t care if you Californians will have to do your on yard work or house work or take care of your own kids. I don’t care if the Motel 6 or Holiday Inn have to pay higher wages to have a U.S. citizen clean its rooms than for an illegal worker. I don’t care if McDonalds will have to raise wages to get more burger slingers. Go ahead, raise the price of lettuce or tomatoes to pay for U.S. labor. If Americans want lettuce, then they’ll have to pay higher prices for it or farmers will have to automate their harvesting. Cotton seeds were once picked by the hand labor of slaves, until the invention of the cotton gin. Most low skill factory labor and harvesting such as done by the Mexicans is convertable to mechization and only done by hand because expoitable cheap labor is availabe. I don’t care anymore for illegal Mexican labor than you do for the fate of citizen labor.
Again, the “damage†of “adopting 10-20 millionâ€. They’re already here for god’s sake. What could possibly get worse?
June 26th, 2006 at 10:34 am
Top Ten Reasons to Vote NO on Immigration Compromise
1. Rewards Illegal Behavior with Clear Path to Citizenship and Voting Rights – Amnesty
• As noted by former Attorney General Ed Meese in the New York Times on May 24, 2006: “Like the amnesty bill of 1986, the current Senate proposal would place those who have resided illegally in the United States on a path to citizenship, provided they meet a similar set of conditions and pay a fine and back taxes. The illegal immigrant does not go to the back of the line but gets immediate legalized status, while law-abiding applicants wait in their home countries for years to even get here. And that’s the line that counts. In the end, slight differences in process do not change the overriding fact that the 1986 law and today’s bill are both amnesties.â€
2. Creates Temporary Worker Program That is Neither Temporary Nor Work-Based
• The bill’s guest worker program would allow millions of illegal immigrants to qualify for permanent green cards within four years. Additionally, the Senate approved Senator Kennedy’s amendment that each year would allow up to 200,000 immigrants who cross the border illegally and work just 6 days a year (including self employment) to qualify for a permanent green card.
3. Unprecedented Wave of Immigrants – 66 Million Over 20 Years
• This bill is estimated to skyrocket the number of immigrants, from its current level of 19 million over the next 20 years, to an unprecedented number. Heritage Foundation: “…[O]ur estimate of the number of legal immigrants who would enter the country or would gain legal status under S. 2611 … [would be] 66 million over the next 20 years.â€
4. Insufficient Border Security
• The Senate rejected an amendment by Senator Isakson that would have prohibited the implementation of any guest worker program that grants legal status to those who have entered the country illegally until the Secretary of Homeland Security has certified to the President and to the Congress that the border security provisions in the immigration legislation are fully funded and operational.
• While the Senate adopted Senator Sessions’ amendment to increase “real fencing†by 370 miles and add 500 miles of vehicle barriers, the House passed a bill requiring at least 700 miles of “real fencingâ€, a more likely needed amount to secure the 2,000 mile long border.
5. Terrorist Loophole Disarms Law Enforcement
• Heritage Foundation reported May 24, 2006: “The Senate’s immigration reform proposal … would restrict local police to arresting aliens for criminal violations of immigration law only, not civil violations. The results would be disastrous. All of the hijackers on (9-11) who committed immigration violations committed civil violations. Under the bill, police officers would have no power to arrest such terrorists.â€
6. Social Security Benefits, Tax Credits for Illegal Work
• The Senate rejected Senator Ensign’s amendment that would have prevented Social Security benefits from being awarded to immigrants for time that they worked illegally in the United States. If the immigration compromise bill before the Senate were enacted into law, an estimated 12 million illegal workers would be able to use their past illegal work to qualify for Social Security benefits.
• Provisions in S. 2611 would require newly legalized immigrants to file tax returns for work they performed while in the U.S. illegally. And while some would be required to pay back taxes, many others could qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit, which has a maximum payout of $4,400 per year.
7. Costs Over $50 Billion A Year to Federal Government; States Foot The Bill for Immigrant Health Care
• Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation described the bill as a “fiscal catastrophe,†and has said the measure would prove to be the largest expansion of government welfare in 35 years. According to Rector, the bill would increase long-term federal spending by at least $50 billion a year.
• The Senate bill does not reimburse state and local governments for health care and education costs related to the millions of undocumented immigrants. While the underlying bill creates a state impact assistance account for future temporary workers, it is an unfunded account.
8. Hurts Small Business
• The Senate approved an amendment by Senator Obama extending Davis-Bacon “prevailing wage†provisions for guest workers, but not American citizens, in all occupations covered by Davis-Bacon (currently limited to federally paid work). Small businesses would be forced to pay inflated wages to guest workers above the pay American citizens receive for performing the same work.
9. Gives Some Immigrant Workers Greater Job Protection Than American Workers
• As reported by Robert Novak of Chicago Sun Times on May 24, 2006: “The bill supposedly would protect American workers by ensuring that new immigrants would not take away jobs. However, the bill’s definition of ‘United States worker’ includes temporary foreign guest workers, so the protection is meaningless… Foreign guest farm workers, admitted under the bill, cannot be ‘terminated from employment by any employer … except for just cause.’ In contrast, American ag workers can be fired for any reason.â€
10. Weak Assimilation/English Requirements
• The Senate approved Senator Inhofe’s amendment to make English the national language and require those seeking citizenship to demonstrate English proficiency and understanding of U.S. History. However, a far weaker amendment by Senator Salazar gutted the Inhofe amendment, leaving it in doubt, and also giving immigrants the right to demand the federal government communicate with them in any language they choose.
June 28th, 2006 at 1:16 am
For those against immigration rights I urge you to actually do some investigating on how America exploits its neighbors. As America pushes unfair trade deals onto other countries, we cannot be surprised that those who lost their jobs will come here seeking new ones.
Some info on NAFTA
NAFTA, offers evidence of how unbalanced trade deals fail workers in both rich and poor countries. NAFTA has cost US workers close to 900,000 jobs and job opportunities. NAFTA was supposed to open markets for American goods and services, creating high-paying jobs at home and prosperity abroad. But the opposite has occurred. In 11 years under NAFTA, the US trade deficit with Canada and Mexico ballooned to 12 times its pre-NAFTA size, reaching $111 billion in 2004.
Nor has NAFTA delivered the promised reductions in poverty in Mexico. Mexico’s workers still struggle for basic human rights, decent wages, and safe workplaces. NAFTA’s failure to protect workers’ rights has allowed employers to continue thwarting independent union organizing in Mexico’s export industries.
While exports and investment boomed, real wages fell and poverty rose in Mexico in the past 11 years, according to the Carnegie Endowment. More than a million Mexican farmers lost their land to low-priced agriculture imports and were forced to search for work in factories or as migrant laborers in the United States. Now investors in Mexico’s export assembly plants are moving to China, where labor costs are even lower.
July 2nd, 2006 at 9:28 pm
Morons are those who don’t get a point even when it’s being rehashed as well as being illustrated from different point of views.
Sometimes you just get tired.
I, on the other hand, try and see both side’s points, and compare them. What’s evident is how incredibly lacking the self-proclaimed legal lecturers focus on the law is, when the reality of most migrants and the forces that drive illegal immigration, are way greater than their incessant whines about law-breaking.
That’s the reason for why I asked Woody if he’d like to see the Hurricane Katrina “looters” be arrested when they stole food to survive. I didn’t see an answer. That illustrates how shallow that side’s logic is. You often here them use analogies to other crimes and how other crimes aren’t excusable no matter what the intentions from the perpetrator were. Well, immigration is not a crime. It is MADE into a crime for Pratctical purposes, Not because it’s morally indefensible, but because it’d be economically, as well as security-wise, impractical to let everyyone in. Only cowards choose to tack it as a true matter or crime, because it’s convenient.
It’s moronic to apply the law without a sense of compassion. Without a thorogugh assessement of justice it’s moronic to apply the law in just its raw form.
Laws need to be based on the dynamics of reality, which you keep ignoring. You can’t just “want” things to be legal in a certain way or you’ll end up with aberrations. That’s what judges, defense lawyers and prosecutors are for. If the justice system lacked one of those elements, it’d be a joke, and society would be a primitive wreck. It’d be the dark age.
The equivalent of that joke would be to proceed with immigration reform with Tom Tancredo as the prosecutor, Sensennbrenner as the judge, while the Senate bill’s authors were being completely pushed aside, as they’re the ones that represent the defense lawyer in this picture. Yet you dare come and talk about fairness to the American people. You keep ignoring 70% of reality and talk about being fair?
As for “rewarding illegal behavior”. It’s just freaking incredible.
The looters during the hurricane were criminals period. The speeder on the freeway is a criminal period. The homeless sleeping on the sidewalk is a criminal period. What asinine way of thinking, shallow as it can get. Phillosophically and morally this is asinine. I don’t just spew that, but if you’re serious about fairness you wouldn’t turn a blind eye toward big chunks of reality.
As for the illegals creating a burden if they were legalized. First off, there are burdens in more than one direction. For example, if burden on others was a true concern to you, you’d be bothered to see any human burdened, not just those of any particular nationality. Secondly, there is already a burden, but nobody has cared, but instead let families and people establish themselves here. There’s a moral, humane aspect of this which you can’t ignore, regardless of how many economical woes you’ve got. You can’t be so savage and blatant that you uproot families after turning a blind eye toward them for decades. That’s incredibly inhumane to do.
And all workers need to be cared for, including citizens. Obviously.
But blame that on the economy which demand a cetain type of labor. Don’t blame the families who’ve established their lives here now. You don’t let people risk their lives, and tend to an economy, and then suddenly kick them out. There’s a moral aspect that can’t be ignored.
Also, they are already here. America is the riches country on earth. Can afford to wage two simultaneous wars abroad. Telling me people, who are obviously willing to work hard, would be its actual demise. That’s quite cynical.
And you can care for American workers without uprooting other’s families. Part of the reason for, comprehensive, reform is to address real economical issues. The worker program is not for being “kind” to foreigners, but based on a real need.
Why the hell would anyone want to hurt American workers? It’s beyond me, and frankly just shows that people haven’t woken up to reality yet. The reality is that parts of the American economy needs the illegal laborers.
And, I’m not saying in a blanket statement that all jobs occupied by illegals needed them. For sure, some Americans have lost their jobs to illegals, and that needs to be addressed. But it can be adressed without being crude and ruthless via policy. Simply adjust the system to match the reality, economically and humanly, rather than pretending that it doesn’t exist. By being realistic, and stop whining.
July 3rd, 2006 at 5:26 am
Amnesty would be costly, as any large societal reform would.
Illegal immigration does cost the country, because how could an unregulated influx of undocumented people not have any adverse effects on a country? Of course it does.
That’s the whole point with immigration reform; to address the problems encompassed by the issue of illegal immigration, so that they can be solved as much as possible. That includes regulating, or re-channeling the influx of illegals.
As for forcing people to go home (if “home” really is where many of them are going) through either atrition or deportation.
I can see despots talking so casually about uprooting people from their homes and forcing families apart. The fact is that decent people wouldn’t find that conceivable. Only a psycho would be ok with creating tragedies. America won’t be better off by acting psycho. It is pshyco to pretend that the best that can be done about illegal immigrants is to make their lives miserable enough until they feel forced to leave. That’s just so cold, almost like a Hollywood movie. I wouldn’t do it to an animal. I know people who do it to cockroaches, but that’s about it. Only despots do it to humans, and now the House Republicans are contenders.
And as if they gave a damn about American workers. Sure, that’s why they’ve blocked minimum wage hikes and encouraged wars where kids would be send off to die and lose limbs. As if they really fought against illegal immigrants out of “compassion” for American workers. It’s a scam. Most Americans don’t even have health-insurance, but are left to lose their healths instead. You tell me that the House Republicans of all have tried to change that for the better. After all they can’t stop talking about the “poor American citizen” suffering from the “big, bad, mean illegal”, but if they really cared about American workers they’d be championing a host of issues that would profoundly increase the quality of life for those workers. Not symbolic stuff like “Marriage-English-Flag”, but real issues like wages and health-insurance.
July 12th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
Raise Hell Ringtone…
I Understand Ringtone I Understand Ringtone One Sided Love Ringtone One Sided Love Ringtone days of the week Ringtone days of the week Ringtone Who Am I Ringtone Who Am I Ringtone Whos Loving Her Now Ringtone Whos Loving Her Now Ringtone Time Off For G…
July 25th, 2006 at 7:40 am
Descriptions of poker pubs their atmospheressbb
August 2nd, 2006 at 4:08 pm
sports picks sports picks
sports picks free sports picks free
December 2nd, 2006 at 1:03 am
Interessando, luogo abbastanza luminoso, penso +5
May 5th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
cc2e214c15eb…
cc2e214c15eba2de17dd…
June 18th, 2008 at 2:38 am
registrierungs bonus code party poker…
Leplus virtual casino gambling online casino roulette casino on the net casino on net com jeu keno…
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:31 am
A well researched site, I’ll link to it from my site thanks