Michelle Malkin’s new Vent takes the WSJ editorial board to task over its claim that “the National Review crowd” is engaging in “irrational fear mongering” in its resistance to the Bush Immigration Reform bill—providing the self-satisfied board yet again (for better or worse) the actual arguments against the proposed legislation compromise, arguments the WSJ editorial board pretends do not exist or have never been expressed coherently or sans froth.
Instead, they claim—in a fascinating (and quite instructive) seven minute internal editorial-meeting video—that the objection to the President’s pro-business policy is essentially “cultural”—which, let’s be honest, is merely code for “these bigoted Buchananites are trying to turn both the gordita and the roofer into endangered species.” Which is absurd; not only do I own Colors on DVD, but the truth is, some of my best friends have teardrop tattoos and El Caminos, and like to hang rags out of the back pockets of their Dickies lowriders.
So not only is such a suggestion condescending, lazy, self-serving, and dishonest—but it likewise ignores that the American people en masse have expressed a genuine concern about border security.
In fact, many of us who oppose the Reform bill are quite open to expanding guest worker programs and even expanding the number of immigrants granted citizenship each year. But what we won’t accept is this cavalier—and quite cynical, actually—dismissal both of the law (are we prepared to say that other laws can be followed just as capriciously?) and, more generally, of the actual concerns over the social ramifications that have little to do with xenophobia and more to do with a system that has increasingly marginalized assimilation in favor of the very kind of multiculturalist ethos that has poisoned much of western Europe.
Were I convinced that we were committed to scrapping the “quilt” metaphor in favor of the melting pot metaphor that has, since the epistemological paradigm shift toward a mainstreaming of postmodern philosophical assumptions, been savaged as “cultural colonialism” by academics whose careers are dependent upon maintaining cultural tensions and competing grievance narratives, I’d be more willing to consider granting broader latitude to these proposed reforms.
But as it stands now, until we either adhere to current law—or else scrap it entirely—I simply cannot support what amounts to rewarding lawbreakers and punishing those who, for following our laws and respecting our process, are still on the outside looking in.
If the WSJ editorial board is looking for people to pick fruit cheaply, then let them push for an expanded guest worker program. But pushing for a reform that doesn’t address the concerns of American citizens—concerns that are (with certain high-profile exceptions) legitimate and well-thought out, not thinly-veiled racism or nativism—before addressing the concerns of illegals, smacks of elitist social engineering, and in the process insults those conservatives who are able to balance their fidelity to the rule of law with their desire to see open markets, a larger labor force, and the commingling of ethnic traits that has made the US so culturally rich and prosperous.
What killed me about the bill was the unseriousness about its provisions.
Sure, we’ll do a background check on people before offering them lifetime legal status…
…but not really, because a good background check takes weeks, not 24 hours.
Or, hey, we’ll verify that people arrived here before 01 Jan 2007…
…and all they need is a note from a friend.
Or, we’ll certify that the border is secure before doing any of those other things…
…because allocating funds for a fence and building the fence are the same thing.
It’s also not “diversity” when the lion’s share of the illegals come from one place: that’s a fast road to our very own Quebec, and we all know how much fun Canada is having with that.
<a href=”http://dicentrasgarden.blogspot.com/2007/06/perils-of-illegal-immigration.html”>I’ve got a good seven reasons</i> why illegal immigration isn’t a good thing, and none of them have to do with racism or chauvinism or any of that rot.
I think there needs to be a new rule for arguments, similar to Godwin’s law, that as soon as your opponent goes for the ad hominem, they’ve just conceded the argument to you.
Easy win.
What it boils down to is that if you don’t enforce your border, your immigration policy is moot…it is de facto open borders. Passing out infinitely-renewable Z-visas makes that policy de jure, a fait accompli dropped into the laps of an American public who thought there was an actual border along their southern frontier.
I’m from Missouri – show me you can control the border and I’ll be happy, just like Jeff, to turn up the immigration quotas. Until then, forget it.
Another problem with the current (non) system? It is skewed entirely in favor of those who presently reside somewhat south of the Rio Grande.
I too could support substantially higher numbers of legal immigrants, so long as there was some real diversity among those allowed to enter the country and begin the path to citizenship.
It is a crime of the highest order to talk about ‘open borders’ yet somehow ignore all of the better educated eastern Europeans (to name but one group of many) who seek the American dream yet are perpetually shunted to the end of the line.
I’m with Patterico – close the borders (yeah, I’m lookin’ at you, Canada…) and deport the criminals first. Then we can talk.
As for gang-affiliated illegals (MS13, Nortenos, Hamas etc.) give em a butt-beeper before flying them to Guatemala, and if they show their face in this country again, shoot the bastards.
But than, I’ve always been a hard-ass.
The problem no one is addressing to my satisfaction, is that a leak is not just caused by a breach of containment, but you also have to have an imbalance of pressure. If you come home and a water main has ruptured in the basement and is spewing all over, what it the first thing you do? You don’t immediately try to patch it, you first turn off the main valve to stem the flow. I have seen nothing in this bill regarding cutting off “humanitarian” aid to immigrants, which needs to be foremost to get my support. All I see are the Democrats taking our money to entice them over here, and the Republicans wanting to take even more to build a friggin fence to keep them out. How about we start by letting us keep all that money, and we would solve alot of the problem right there. Then I do think stream-lining the process of getting a green card seems a good idea, and enforcing the laws we already have, I still don’t understand what exactly is wrong with them.
Check out that WSJ video. It is shocking how utterly out of touch those people are….
You certainly don’t want wide open borders AND a welfare state. It doesn’t take a Milton Friedman to see where that leads.
Just like with heet, they found it easier to argue against a charicature of their opponent’s position rather than addressing the substance of same. It is easier to imply that conservatives are against immigration, or are afraid of brown people, than actually argue against the substance of the objections to the problems with illegal immigration.
Excactly, otherwise it would be like wiping your ass and THEN taking a shit. I feel the same way about my wifes “suggestion” that I rinse off my plate before putting it in the dishwasher. Of course, I am white, male and protestant, which makes me an oppressive prick.
Or recognize that most fruit-picking could be done more cheaply over time with machines.
As a political matter, I think Jefferson has hit the core of it—which is that there is no reason for anyone to expect any new law will be enforced when the current law is not being enforced (indeed, not only not being enforced, but actively undercut in any number of ways).
I imagine that without the cheap labor it would be possible to mechanize a lot more farming tasks. Furthermore, I think that would be a net plus for humanity in general.
Great site! Please consider adding a link to the Internet Radio Network. At the IRN you can listen for free to 25 of Americas top Talk Shows via Streaming Audio!
http://netradionetwork.com
You would think that over time, Steve’s blog pimping would become less annoying, but sadly, no.
Wayull….
Let’s do some math, sort of. Figure that eight million of the supposed twelve million illegals are Mexican. We can suppose they consist of the most energetic, most risk-taking, most motivated, and least contented citoyens of Mexico.
Now, imagine that demographic shoved back south of the Rio Grande.
The next flood of refugees would be the rich and the government ‘crats, while we have an entertaining look at a society whose roof has shot into trans-lunar space and which is trying to reconstitute itself with absolutely zero experience at it.
Mexico uses us as a safety valve to avoid reform.
I’d sort of like to see them reform–have some near-family in Mexico–but the process could be messy. Real messy.
Maybe we should send some Americans down there illegally to do the reforming Mexicans don’t want to do.
The rule of law has always been predicated upon a shared understanding at some level of what the law means and with the attendent cultural institutions to buttress it without having to fall back on a pitiless comprehensive enforcement of all laws at all times under all circumstances. The current kerfuffle over immigration is little more than the scuffle du jour in this battle wherein the answer to laws which are honored mostly in the breach will be resolved by having …, wait for it …, more laws which will be honored mostly in the breach. If you’re bored, compare and contrast the immigration imbroglio and how effective the intent of the laws governing it have been with, say, the intent of the laws governing gun control.
It is the epitome of intellectual utopian hubris to imagine that human behavior can be codified into a rather dry set of laws, bylaws, rules, regulations, procedures, orders, processes, and ordinances in the absence of a shared cultural tradition—and that tradition is what we are losing rapidly as it is sacrificed in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism. The balkanization of our society is less a cause than an effect of these battles.
Sometimes I wonder whether it is all an unintentional breakdown of complex systems or if there really is a master plan to bring it all down, sort of a societal Dadaism writ large. Does that make me paranoid? A conspiracy nut? A denialist? All of the above?
Sigh.
Cranky’s right about this – when wages are at $2-3 per hour, it’s pretty hard to justify a robot that costs $100,000 (or more) to do that job.
Out-fucking-rageous. We just had a judge slap a permanent injunction on a municipality here that tried to enforce an ordinance on illegals in renting, contracting, etc. because it was against federal law. Now here we have cities and states openly going against federal (and constitutional) law with utter impunity. The situation is completely out of hand, and some enterprising politician is going to figure it out soon enough.
TW: year69 – talked about your chapped lips
If big business backed the amnesty bill for cheap labor, won’t their costs go up if illegals are granted amnesty and citizenship?
I thought the idea of illegls was that you didn’t have to pay Social security, health insurance, a minimum wage, for goodness sake.
Any ideas?
Okay, that’s three times today you’ve made me laugh today, McG.
Thanks.
I hope they hold off a little longer on this legislation. I have 25 yards of redwood mulch sitting in my driveway, and it ain’t spreading itself !
Perfectly-written as usual.
There are ignorant people on both sides of this one.
Then there are people like Michelle Malkin (whom I otherwise admire) who refuse to budge from a position of Invasion!!! Reconquista!!!
First of all, as most regulars know, I am married to a Mexican born woman who is a naturalized US citizen. She entered the US legally, then overstayed her visa and lived here illegally until the Reagan amnesty. Her children are both US citizens.
I also live on the perimeter of ground zero of Mexican immigration. We are not Santa Ana, CA (A city where English is rarely spoken) but we are a county of 400,000 residents including 75,000 illegal aliens.
Here is a link to our latest grand jury report on illegal immigration and its effects on our county
http://www.sbcgj.org/2007/immigrationeffects.pdf
One of the key components missing from enforcement has been ICE deportation of criminals who are here illegally. Patterico has fine grasp on this issue and vast experience with illegal aliens and the LA criminal justice scene.
I notice Patterico makes a distinction betwen round ups of hard working illegals and the round up and deportation of violent criminals.
This is an important place to start.
Hard working illegals who are employed by legitimate businesses using fraudulent documents are committing ongoing crimes: Residing here illegally and document fraud are the two most obvious. But these people pay taxes via withholding, they pay into Social Security etc. They pay property taxes via rent, they pay sales taxes via purchases. Often they are the parents of minors who are US citizens. They are among our most productive residents.
Workplace raids are disruptive to the local economy. For example, strawberry fields never get raided even though at least 75% of the pickers are thought to be illegals. Think about it. Large field. 10 or more groups of twenty pickers spread in easy sight. Nowhere to run. No raids. Why? The crop is highly perishable. Those illegals that do avoid the sweep hide out for a few days and the rest of the crop goes unpicked which cripples the industry.
From the Senate’s point of view, this is not ideal.
Neither is the prospect of seeing US citizen minor children seperated from their illegal alien parents. As US citizens, the US born children of illegal aliens have rights and entitlements. Deporting their parents and crippling US citizen minors personal lives over parents illegal status is distasteful to most politicians… and most Americans…. even those who vehemently oppose illegal immigration. Most Americans are not in favor of tearing apart families.
The common answer is: send the parents home and the kids will soon follow. This rarely works out so tidily. The US citizen children remain entitled to benefits, education, etc. The parents tend to leave the children with friends, neighbors or relatives and then recross illegally nearly immediately. The economic and social impacts of deportation on the families result in increased costs via entitlements to the Federal government.
So to sum it up, workplace sweeps and deportation cost a lot of money. Deportation of illegal parents of US citizens result in increased demands upon federal, state and local resources by their minor US citizen offspring.
It causes a huge mess and no one who deals with the minors comes away happy.
The laws that give citizenship to children born in the US to illegals have saddled us with this dilemna. These people will remain at the front of the line. It isn’t totally right, but someone can come here illegally, get pregnant and jump to the head of the line…. this will always work to the benefit of Mexicans because of geography.
Next it is important to realize that immigration and migration are not new. One of our northernmost states (Montana) has a Spanish name for a reason.
California, Texas, Arizona to name a few have inextricable and centuries old family, social, economic, cultural ties to Mexico. There are reasons why the Senators from Arizona, California, Nevada, etc. worked together across the aisle on immigration.
Malkin acts like it is all pandering. But she neglects the opportunity to gain understanding of the realities here at the ground zero of Mexico immigration… well she does yell “Fence” and “Wall” alot, but anyone here who has ever watched more than 2 minutes of video taken of the existing border walls and fences knows that new fencing and walls (high tech or low tech) will be little more than a speed bump.
A final note on the economics of illegal immigration.
Take a look at the county report I linked.
Look at the costs. $4 million for health.
$400K for incarceration… those are the two that jump out.
That seems like a lot, but if 40,000 of those 75,000 illegals work and produce just $110 each a year of cost savings (via productivity and/or working for a lower wage) that cost is covered.
California’s agribusiness and construction and service industries have already said yes to that math a long time ago….. like centuries ago when vaqueros were cheaper than cowboys
How many times today did I make you laugh yesterday?
Perhaps you missed this:
NOR Challenges WSJ to Debate the issue:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmVjZDBiM2MwMTk0MjNlMDdjMDI2ZDM2MzE4ZGViOGU=
Nary a syllable from WSJ:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTg3NzcxNmNmMzM3ZDM2ZDk5NDZlNmQ1M2MxOTQ3M2I=
All illegals are criminals. It may help to boot out the violent ones, but so long as you let criminals remain, the violent ones will be able to hide among them.
The argument is over whether everyone’s equal before the law, or if some people are more equal than others. The welfare state, unlimited immigration, multiculturalism, and the nanny state seem to come together in a perfect storm of reorganizing society to the detriment of those who want to live within the law. There are constantly more laws regulating the petty aspects of our lives, and ever more excuses for not pursuing major crimes.
Look at the story out of London—police refused to even come look around after a burglary, but the moment the victim tried to get his possession back, they found an excuse to arrest him. That’s where we’re headed.
Let me try another example, look at the fence around your local county lock-up, then compare that to the one around your states big house. It is alot easier to contain people who aren’t as motivated. If you continue to give out freebies to anyone who can get here, we are talking about a maximum security level fence 2000 miles long. It isn’t as crazy as alphie’s balloon fence, but it is getting close. Take away the incentives and a fence is alot more feasible, is all I am saying. Unless you just don’t like saving money.
I think in California the “savings” equation has been decided.
People have opted for cheap labor. $100 per person per year in my county is $40 million. My guess is illegal immigration costs us 1/4 that.
We have around 40,000 illegals working in our county. They each need to provide $250 of productivity increase and or wage savings to offset $10 million in health welfare education etc.costs.
If they work for $1 an hour less over 1 1/2 months, they are done
SteveG, what about the costs to our public schools? Hospitals? Factor everything in and get back to me. The Mexican economy depends on recissions from this country. But I type in “current mexican leader” into wikipedia and get nothing useful. I thought that was a contentious campaign, but I guess it’s a foregone conclusion: Illegal Mexicans will continue pouring into this country because it’s good policy. And politics and economics.
Bullshit. I have seen first-hand how uninsured illegal drivers cause grief for Americans. I am past that crap. We have created a dual-tiered legal and social system that selectively recognizes a person’s status, based on expedience.
I lean to the left on most issues, but on border security I am steadfast. If we can’t CLOSE and secure our borders, then all other pronouncements are fatuous shadow dancing.
Yes, that needs to change. It’s stupid. Maybe that’s the law that needs to change first.
Agree, I don’t want to see this either, nor do I want them to become “wards of the state” (meaning as taxpayers, we have to pay to raise them),we need to change it so the children can return with their parents. Then we don’t need to worry about the families being ripped apart. See? Problem solved.
SteveG,
I think my county might have a bit more of a burden than yours then…I am P.O’d because I watch the Polish and Irish spend 10 years waiting to get the green card, while La Raza marches in the streets demanding full rights NOW!!!!!! Kids wait 3 hours in the emergency room while every cowboy and campesano from central Mexico waits to have their #$%&ing head cold and allergies examined. The county jail bursts with Surenos, Latin Kings and drug mules from Tecalitlan. Some of the schools around here have been dragged down into the “what the #$%&” range in standardized testing scores because large parts of their student bodies don’t have English speaking parents. What is some guy who works front desk at the local NAPA Auto Parts supposed to do – send his kids to private school and rush his kids to a private doc’s office?
I stopped caring if they cut grass well or stack boxes at the local warehouse with great efficiency. I’m watching people who didn’t bargain for any of this get washed away in a tide of the Third World transplanted to Illinois. I can afford to dodge this, and I have. I could avert my eyes and not care. But since I have done stuff like go and fight for the auto parts clerk and his family, I’d sure feel like doo-doo watching them have their lives, educations and neighborhoods degraded without giving a crap.
If this means I pay $.50 more for a pint of strawberries – so be it.
Wow – that was a bit too angry for me, normally. Time for bed, I think.
Well I spent too long composing a comment at work and when I went to post it it went [poof]. So I decided to repost it on my own blog instead.
For what it’s worth, I agree with the WSJ Editors, Malkin’s gorilla act notwithstanding. I can’t count the number of times I’ve posted an economic rebuttal to an anti-immigrationist economic argument that asserts immigrantion causes economic victimization for citizens only to be waved off with a “you stupid libertarians/economics isn’t everything” response. At the core of the anti-immigrationist zeitgeist are a lot of people that we already have too many Mexicans in the United States, legal or illegal. And you don’t have to take my word for it. Just go to Google and search for ‘immigration American culture’ and read from some of the 15 million hits what these folks have to say for yourself.
yours/
peter.
Hey, peter, screw off.
My wife is an immigrant.
A fucking LEGAL immigrant.
So take your charges of racism, fold them ‘til they’re all corners and shove them up your ass.
Yeah? My wife is a naturalized citizen too. Do you have a point?
I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I don’t care. Fuck you too, and thanks for proving the point of the WSJ editors Jeff was writing about. Asshole.
yours/
peter.
Really?
Me, I’d rather have the rule of law than cheap labor. I guess I’m just funny that way.
Good in theory Rob, but when you start legislating economics funny things happen. Just ask any honest socialist.
Well I spent too long composing a comment at work and when I went to post it it went [poof]. So I decided to repost it on my own blog instead.
For what it’s worth, I agree with the WSJ Editors, Malkin’s gorilla act notwithstanding. I can’t count the number of times I’ve posted an economic rebuttal to an anti-immigrationist economic argument that asserts immigrantion causes economic victimization for citizens only to be waved off with a “you stupid libertarians/economics isn’t everything†response. At the core of the anti-immigrationist zeitgeist are a lot of people that we already have too many Mexicans in the United States, legal or illegal. And you don’t have to take my word for it. Just go to Google and search for ‘immigration American culture’ and read from some of the 15 million hits what these folks have to say for yourself.
yours/
peter.
So ,everyone is entitled to a job?
Illegal immigration is racist, class warfare against all legal immigrants from around the world.
Shame on all those racists for inspiring class warfare against people who believe in the rule of law.
Fuck your racist, class warfare ass Peter Jackson!
So, everyone is entitled to a job, but only with government approval?
I think ya’ll are missing the bigger picture.
It looks like the Republicans have learned their lessons from Pete Wilson’s tragic Prop 207 experience. The WSJ’s editors are just playing their part.
Republicans took notes from 207 and learned that they will need to accomplish two things before the next immigration tussle begins. First, they need to premptively short-circuit the “Rascist” label that decimated Wilson. They’ve done this in spades by publicly drawing the criticism that they’re being “too soft” on illegals.
Second, they needed to sound-out most Americans’ feelings on the topic. And they have done this, too, in spades. They know the general mood is less forgiving (but not necessarily “rascist”), and that this mood is widely bi-partisan. And now Republican Senators can saunter towards that bipartisan majority at their leisure knowing it will appear they are responding to their base as they do so.
Pretty tricky, huh? It’s been a multi-deminsional media-play, and worthy of Rove.
syn:
Shitty, stupid law ≠“rule of law.”
Let’s take one piece of cost: educating the children of illegal immigrants at $7k/year per child (much more expensive in the Northeast). What economic “rebuttal” could possibly explain how an illegal alien stawberry picker/construction worker making $25k a year, and of those not being paid cash under the table.. even if they use a fraudulent SS# and pay all taxes at that income level which would include a tax credit/refund if they claim children.. how can illegals at that income level come anywhere close to paying enough taxes to pay for 4 children? Or 2 children? Or one? Not including healthcare costs, costs of police protection, roads paid for by taxes, cost to incarcerate as 17% in federal prison are illegals, social security paying more benefits than they take in, other costs, etc.
I don’t see how any “rebuttal” could possibly show anything other than a net economic loss for taxpayers regarding the cost of illegal aliens.
And just because we have low income Americans who don’t pay their “fair share” either, that in no way explains or justifies why we need to legalize 14 million more who knowingly broke our laws by entering our country illegally and staying here.
I’m bothered that with the current proposed amnesty proposal, we are giving preferential treatment to largely uneducated mexican and central american lawbreakers, when we should instead be bringing in more Ukranian engineers, Cambodian physicians, and Chilean businessmen who want to immigrate here playing by the rules
Yeah? Doesn’t look that way to me:
Poll showing 52% support, 44% against immigration bill
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/16013
Americans support guest worker program 2 to 1
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15891
Not to mention that Latino support of the GOP fell from 44% in 2004 back down to 29% in 2006. There are 44 million Latino Americans in the US with about 12.5 million registered voters.
And look, I think the bill sucks, but not because it legalizes the people cutting our lawns per se, but because it essentially retains intact all of the Jim Crow era quotas and restrictions that have broken our border in the first place. And then there’s the little part of the bill that strips all Americans of their right to hire or work for anyone without government approval. Maybe I’m nuts, but I don’t think American’s ability to provide for their families should depend on the integrity of a government database. But like Rob said, I’m just funny that way.
Most schools and local services are financed with sales taxes and property taxes. Even illegal aliens need groceries, clothes, housing, etc. They pay these taxes just like you and I do when they consume these items. Legalizing them would probably increase property tax receipts because it would be easier for them to rent higher quality housing instead of hiding out in marginal areas, crashing with friends and family, etc.
yours/
peter.
Well, no. But neither should low-skilled Americans have to compete with low-skilled criminals. Especially since the low-skilled Americans are barred, by law, for working for the same wage as the low-skilled criminals.
Sadly, yes. A bad law can be repealed or amended. Simply not enforcing a law because it’s “shitty and stupid” is the antithesis of the rule of law. Particularly when that failure to enforce is selective.
If I committed fraud on a daily basis, how long would it be before I ended up in prison? Why are illegals allowed to get away with it?
What about equality? Shouldn’t everyone be subject to the same laws? Why should people who decide to ignore our laws get rewarded while people who want to follow our laws have to wait years to be allowed to become citizens?
Start fining people who employ illegals to the point that hiring citizens is cheaper. That’ll dry up the demand. Then start deporting the illegals that are convicted of crimes—no matter how minor—while they’re here. Then we can talk about what to do about the hard-working illegals who have only committed fraud, identity theft, etc.`
Here are some numbers to think about.
This is an excerpt from an email I received:
Well said, but it’s even worse than that. It’s not limited to just the low-skilled American workers taking it on the chin, as skilled carpenters, mechanics, and other skilled workers are having their wages depressed by the flood of illegal aliens. According to BLS, average hourly wage for carpenters in Houston is $14.70/hr .. and that’s with the help of a booming construction market, which won’t be there forever. Note that this is not the starting salary, or a carpenter apprentice salary, but AVERAGE salary of an experienced carpenter..which means only after 5 or 10 years experience will a carpenter average that amount.
When I was a boy, being a carpenter was decent paying job which could support a family. Can I “prove” that illegal aliens depress wages? No, but I know it to be true.
The homebuilders, farmowners, factory owners, and restauranteurs who hire illegal workers pocket the labor savings while depressing the wages of legal workers and screaming ‘racist xenophobe’ at those who object to the situation.. simultaneously throwing the social costs of the millions of illegals onto the shoulders of Joe Taxpayer who pays for the schooling, medical expenses, free meals and other costs for the family of illegals.. oh, except for all the massive amounts of taxes unfairly paid by the downtrodden illegals in the form of 2% of rent going to school taxes, 0% of groceries which are typically tax exempt, and 20% of their $100 monthly gasoline expenditures for those not using public transportation.. And they won’t even be able to collect social security!
But the new immigration bill giving amnesty to the lawbreakers will solve all these problems I’m told.
According to that same database, the average for a carpenter in Michigan is over $19/hour. Of course, nobody is building shit in Michigan because it costs too much. Life is a bitch.
Look, those are some of the most cut-throat businesses in the country. They don’t pocket the savings, they pass them on to the consumer so they can actually move product. You jack the price of houses, groceries and restaurant meals up 30% and see how many jobs are left for Americans to fill. It would fucking destroy the growth we are all enjoying. I can’t believe how few people can see that. They aren’t taking jobs Americans won’t do, they are taking jobs that wouldn’t exist at the wages most Americans are demanding. People don’t just decide to open a restaurant somewhere cost be damned, if it costs more to build than the expected profits warrant then it doesn’t get built. Same with houses, same with factories, same with strip malls.
If the only way to fix the illegal immigration problem is to legalize the illegal aliens already here, why won’t the politicians legalize drugs? Our increasingly draconian drug laws have been making felons of millions of Americans for years.
I guess that since big business and the labor unions aren’t behind the Drug Legalization movement, therefore we haven’t a chance at an intelligent rewrite of some of our drug laws.
More about the similarities between the current illegal immigration bill and the Drug War at my blog:
<a href=” http://mbmusings.wordpress.com/2007/06/09/legalize-it/” target=”_blank”>mbmusings.wordpress.com</a>
Funny, up until recently homebuilding construction has been extremely profitable, restaurants have notoriously high markups, factory owners.. well it depends on what they’re making doesn’t it?.. I’m sure those $400 Coach handbags cost a lot to make, as does the $180/plate Kuwayaki-Grilled with Fresh Wasabi at Megu NYC. Who knows, maybe some of those hospitals so burdened with the costs of illegal aliens in their emergency rooms who cannot pay, might pass some of their savings down to others in a competitive market?
Either way, it’s safe to say that businesses in general, not just those which hire illegals, keep as much in their pocket as is possible.. which is normally the way it should be. Sometimes they pocket savings from hiring illegals or other cost saving measures, and other times they may, under competitive pressures, forced to pass along “some” portion of it in the form of lower prices for their product.
My big problem with this situation, which you don’t seem to want to adddress (beyond your ever so informed assumption that restaurants will all raise prices 30% or more or go out of business!), is that these businesses which are hiring illegals, are passing the considerable social costs of these illegals onto taxpayers. They get the benefit while others are stuck with the bill.. and in some cases, depressed wages on top of that bill.
Some businesses would have to raise prices without illegal labor, others would not be able to at all.. and everthing in between. I reject your economic disaster scenario as typical of the dishonest overheated rhetoric JeffG addressed in his post. One thing is for sure, without illegals, taxpayers would be far less burdened (putting more $$ in their pockets?)
Indeed – but the 15 illegals living in a large, but run down house in Carpentersville or Elgin or Aurora, IL are not exactly shouldering the property tax burden the way the rest of the legal citizens of Kane County are… Frankly, most of the money goes home in remittances – unless Western Union just happens to have found a huge and dynamic market for telegrams here in Northern Illinois…
That reference to Aurora touched on an important point.
Here is a link with nifty pie charts:
http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/46.pdf
Inside that report you’ll see how illegal Hispanic immigrants are beginning to disperse into new areas where they now compose up to 40% of the foreign born.
These areas do not have the infrastructure to deal with the influx. Federal laws on education, health, etc coupled with immigrants needs for those services put a huge burden percentagewise on these areas.
On California?
Not so much because the infrastructure is already in place and has been for decades.
I have a link that I can dig out (I think it cites the Sacramento Bee) that says over 70% of Californians favor a path to citizenship for illegals. http://www.immigrationforum.org/documents/PressRoom/PublicOpinion/2007/PollingSummary0407.pdf
I submit that a good deal of that attitude comes from familiarity. If so, I share that attitude because I have lived with illegal immigrants for decades.
In areas like Nebraska and Iowa, this is new. I was reading about the ICE raids on the meat packing plants out there and found letters on the subject from Iowa’s Governor and a Senator. Check these out
http://www.irnin.org/docs/vilsack_pr121306.pdf
http://www.irnin.org/docs/harkinletter.pdf
http://www.irnin.org/docs/vilsack_to_president_bush_122006.pdf
I found a few others addressed to Bush that basically told him that ICE was using human misery as a tool to implement policy.
If I am President or Director of Homeland Security and I get mail like that from Iowa and Nebraska…. I don’t even want to open the mail from California.
I think we (conservatives) should agree on a few things though:
A. The Senate has a daunting task. 12 million illegals have about 3.2 million US citizen children. Many illegal families have children of mixed citizenship. Unraveling that mess with firmness and compassion with an eye to the rights of citizens is a herculean problem.
B. Moving 12 million people out of this country would take a long time. Most of them are entitled to appeal, all to due process.. Families would be broken, some industries would struggle. Deportation is a very costly option.
C. Powerful lobbyists and special interest groups have a dog in this fight. And that dog is cheap productive labor. Read Sen. Harkins letter to Cherthoff and wonder aloud if maybe the meatpacking industry in his state has some swing.
Note that Harkins is on the Senate appropriations committee. Untangling that web will take time.
D. Illegal alien felons should be deported. Period. Reentry into the USA should get a penalty of a life sentence.
E. Change the citizenship laws. Children born to illegals in the USA should not be given automatic citizenship.
F. Tamperproof, scannable national ID. Everyone must show this in order to work. Everyone.
That means from North Dakota to Southern Cal.
Government to provide scanners and database management
(Bringing Illegal aliens that currently reside in the US into the Homeland Security database is better than the shadowland we have now. Stop with the nonsensical argument that having 12 million resident underground is somehow a better security situation than getting a photo and fingerprint ID is)
G. We need to do the math on emails of studies that claim hundreds of billions of dollars of costs (with no offsets) generated by 12 million people. We should also do the math on the reverse claim that illegals provide trillions in benefits to the US. We should be the party with the most accurate calculator. (And I admit my math is awful)
H. Improving the economies of our neighbors to the south is the best way to stop illegal immigration from there. Mexico has made huge strides in the last 25 years. The standard and quality of life there seems to have really improved. Our insatiable consumption of drugs and the explosion in violence of the cartels this consumption spawns will destroy those gains. Our drug problem is the biggest fly in the ointment of our neighbors security that we can control and it needs to be addressed. Now.
In the meantime give the Senators some slack… they are not trying to sell us out to Mexico. It is a tough problem. They have to consider economies, families, citizens, confusing and conflicting laws, entitlements, practices, states rights, welfare, health, security.
Bullshit.
According to Rasmussen, only 23% of American citizens supported the bill.
A better way to check your cognitive dissonance is to check what happened in the Senate. The. Bill. Failed. The jokesters who claim to represent us do pay a lot to find out how their constituencies feel since otherwise they get fired in re-election bids. The fact is that the senators knew how much citizens hated the proposed amnesty.
Tell me, Steve, do you own a winery near Pelosi’s?
SteveG,
It’s threads like this one that remind me that I am not on the far “right.” When it comes to economic-matters, they sound like a bounch of lumbering stegosauruses.
The “Law and Order” right has talked itself into a corner on this issue. They’re stuck either advocating for mass deportations and leagues of fencing, or advocating perversely for the imposition of government controls over huge tracts of our currently unfettered, black-market.
So much for free people and free markets.
I’ll say it again, when it comes to economics, the party that owns the Libertarian center will own American politics. Immigration is largely an economic issue, with humanitarian complications, so the winner of the debate about controlling it, I think, will demonstrate my point in 2008.
Even my favorite Anglo-phile conservative, Mark Steyn, is beginning to sound stale on the issue. Time to take down his pin-up from behind the bar.
So much for honest characterization of the positions of your ideological opponents, with strawmen thrown in for good measure. Good to know you’re not one of those horrid “far” rightwingnuts, but instead, one of the sensible ‘centrists’ on this issue, in stark contrast to us knuckle-draggers with whom you disagree.
First, you present a false choice: “advocating for mass deportations and leagues of fencing, or advocating perversely for the imposition of government controls”
If there were even mildly serious efforts to crack down on employers of illegal aliens, including issuance of a Social Security ID with information that could be easily cross-checked with a database, many/most illegals could not find work and would self-deport. I have photo and scanner data on my driver’s license, so why in the hell in this day and age are we still using a paper SS card with no photo or data, including biometric data?
Also, survey after survey shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans think we need to be doing much more to control our borders… which would put you and others who disagree on the fringe.
And how centrist of you to characterize enforcement of existing immigration laws, one of the most basic constitutional responsibilities of our govt., as “imposition of government controls”. Do you similarly consider enforcement of rape laws to be an imposition of government controls?
Look, you want to debate the issue, then do so. Just do us all a favor and check your dishonest characterizations, phony posturing and strawmen at the door.