The White Stuff is Hypocrisy
It's time to address the issue of border control here at The Chief Source.
I must say something about these anti-immigration hard liners...
These people are a rare breed, people who are actually farther to the right than Bush. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these the people who tend to champion free markets, criticising nations that put tariffs on imports and subsidize their industries? The global market, the logic goes, runs best without government interference. Let the suppliers (our companies) and demanders (your people) alone to work things out. The invisible hand ad nauseum...
But when you put a sombrero on the issue, their tune changes dramatically.
It is obvious to these people that Mexico, in the interests of sound capitalism should not only allow, but invite U.S. corporations across the border. Everyone benefits from trade! But what about Mexican workers crossing the other way? Won't that low-cost-labor benefit small American business owners and ultimately us, the end consumer? Shouldn't we let them decide how they chose to do business? No sir! Those Mexicans are stealing jobs from Americans! (Not competing for, but stealing.) Turns out, time and time again, that competition is only holy when we have an advantage (see Japanese steal or African cotton).
Hold that thought...
There is a famous long-forgotten inscription on the base of the Statue of Liberty:
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!!
Haven't these Mexican workers come here, like our ancestors, in the great tradition of American immigration: to provide better lives for their families? Or is that pre-Sept 11th mumbo jumbo? As a last line of defense, the anti-immigration hard liners, confronted with an economic and moral double standard, always play the terrorism card. Even against our trading partner, peaceful neighbor and ally in the War on Terrorism. Wouldn't we be safer if we offered these people a legal, monitorable, controlable means of entering our country?
Now, for the elephant in the room. I understand that at the heart of this issue is the fact that "illegals" currently cost American tax payers $45bn each year in education, prison and health costs (by the high end estimates). However, if these workers were brought out of the shadows and started paying taxes like you an I (instead of bribing traffickers) then it seems to me, that this problem evaporates and the wonder of free markets can chug on.
And how many Mexicans would flood across the borders? Well according to our right wing laissez faire advocates...as many as we demanded. These people assure us that the assembly line didn't cost us jobs, but freed us up and allowed us to have better, more fulfilling jobs. It doesn't surprise me that these people would subconsciously favor robots over Mexicans.
Can someone please give me a valid reason why upstanding, hard-working Mexicans who are willing to play by the rules and pay taxes on their earnings, should not be allowed to come across our border and work?
These people are a rare breed, people who are actually farther to the right than Bush. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these the people who tend to champion free markets, criticising nations that put tariffs on imports and subsidize their industries? The global market, the logic goes, runs best without government interference. Let the suppliers (our companies) and demanders (your people) alone to work things out. The invisible hand ad nauseum...But when you put a sombrero on the issue, their tune changes dramatically.
It is obvious to these people that Mexico, in the interests of sound capitalism should not only allow, but invite U.S. corporations across the border. Everyone benefits from trade! But what about Mexican workers crossing the other way? Won't that low-cost-labor benefit small American business owners and ultimately us, the end consumer? Shouldn't we let them decide how they chose to do business? No sir! Those Mexicans are stealing jobs from Americans! (Not competing for, but stealing.) Turns out, time and time again, that competition is only holy when we have an advantage (see Japanese steal or African cotton).
Hold that thought...
There is a famous long-forgotten inscription on the base of the Statue of Liberty:
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!!
Haven't these Mexican workers come here, like our ancestors, in the great tradition of American immigration: to provide better lives for their families? Or is that pre-Sept 11th mumbo jumbo? As a last line of defense, the anti-immigration hard liners, confronted with an economic and moral double standard, always play the terrorism card. Even against our trading partner, peaceful neighbor and ally in the War on Terrorism. Wouldn't we be safer if we offered these people a legal, monitorable, controlable means of entering our country?
Now, for the elephant in the room. I understand that at the heart of this issue is the fact that "illegals" currently cost American tax payers $45bn each year in education, prison and health costs (by the high end estimates). However, if these workers were brought out of the shadows and started paying taxes like you an I (instead of bribing traffickers) then it seems to me, that this problem evaporates and the wonder of free markets can chug on.
And how many Mexicans would flood across the borders? Well according to our right wing laissez faire advocates...as many as we demanded. These people assure us that the assembly line didn't cost us jobs, but freed us up and allowed us to have better, more fulfilling jobs. It doesn't surprise me that these people would subconsciously favor robots over Mexicans.Can someone please give me a valid reason why upstanding, hard-working Mexicans who are willing to play by the rules and pay taxes on their earnings, should not be allowed to come across our border and work?
By Robert - 3/30/2006
12 Comments:
Can someone please give me a valid reason why upstanding, hard-working Mexicans who are willing to play by the rules and pay taxes on their earnings, should not be allowed to come across our border and work.
Anyone who immigrates legally (work visa - green card)should be welcomed.
Legality is the point.
The system in place presently encourages unethical employers to "import" illegal aleins (forget the "guest worker" moniker) soley to be exploited for the gain of the greedy. The worker is a mere pawn in the arrangement.
I saw firsthand in 2000 - a 300 unit federally funded cluster homes for the poor - built by illegal aliens(from Mexico) who were trucked in like cordwood in the back of pickup trucks. Com,e payday, the "boss" would hand over a reather large sum of cash to the labor foreman who would in turn distribute in any way he felt like doing. No SS, Medicare, Local, State Fed taxes were collected on any of this. All this occuring wide out in the open in a large west Cleveland suburb.
AMAZING- but you see the fix was in by dirty politicians who overruled all pertaining laws (OSHA, Tax Codes, YOU NAME IT!)
I distinguish between illegal entrants into this country and Legal Immigrants who enter by the rules. As you said, if you play by the rules - No problema.
I am sure that Bush's "Guest Worker" program is driven by these same corrupt employer/contributers who have a addiction to cheap labor and complete "freedom" from all applicable laws.
I say enforce the standing laws - throw the corrupt in jail and get off the scapegoating of hungry - worker-pawns in this vicious game.
Side Note on fairness:
Abramoff gets 5 yrs 11 months in prison for virtually corrupting the whole world.
Congressman James Traficant got 8+ yrs in Fed Pokey fro taking free asphalt from a Mafia contractor.
I tend to think the strongest gripes about labor issues, especially as related to Mexico and the Japanese steel issue from past years, come from much more left-leaning labor groups. Should people who wish to emmigrate to the US and become gainfully employed tax-payers be able to do so, especially as you said in the name of free-markets, by all means. The problem is that employers take advantage of illegal immigrants willingness to work at below minimum wage - which benefits no one. As far as protectionist trade with Japan goes, the WTO stopped the US from enforcing the vast majority of steel-related trade regulations stemming from the Bush era, but also threatened to come down on Japan for unfair trade practices because a number of Japanese companies were intentionally violating international trade law through a process known as 'dumping', whereby Japanese steel exporters were attmepting to sell steel products well below cost in an effort to flood the market with cheap steel and restict competitive forces form US and other foreign steel companies. Both the EU and WTO publicly recognized this though still rightly and fairly faulted the US for attempting to implement resticitve trade practices. Also, arguing comparing free trade agreements and open cross-border employment is not a comparison of apples to apples, though I agree the 'system' or lack thereof in place right no is very broken. Just because I buy Nestle candy bars manufactured in the US for cost savings doesn't mean I can show up in Switzerland and expect that the Swiss will allow me to work as a Swiss citizen. This is a problem that extends well beyond the US and into all nations which choose to take advantage of cheap forgein labor and production.
I must also add that the REAL agenda behind this acute need to "Reform" immigration issues is underwritten by the unscrupulous seeking cheap labor and complete "deregulation" (if possible) from all the applicable laws.
No attention is paid to the social consequences of of where any of the chips may fall - for that matter.
And, we shall see if our federal govt in Washington DC even HAS the ability to do the right thing for the Nation.
Petey,
Good points.
Darwal,
Fair enough. You are absolutely right to mention that the unions on the left are a major component of the anti-immigration militia. I should have mentioned them as well.
The reason that I was focusing on the xenophobes on the right was that I had just read an article about those 'Minutemen' cowboys who have taken it on themselves to patrol the border like a bunch of vigilantes and protect American family values. Plus you find the two contradictory positions most often on the right. (That is...laissez faire capitalism is Godly...and...Mexican workers shouldn't be allowed to compete for our jobs.)
Union members who recognize the value in some tariffs and subsidies are not hypocritical when they push to exclude Mexicans from the labor pool. They may be wrong on both counts, but at least they're consistent in their view that government has an important role in restricting the market.
You are right that my comparison isn't quite apples and apples. In fact, I really expected to get crucified for this post...oh well. (Pete must be studying or something.) Anyhow, I really was hoping to shake things up and get people talking about this issue. It is interesting cause it is one that Bush might not be wrong on.
Your point that there are contradictory views on the right is because you and many people look at this two dimensionally - a topic disussed on this site more than once. I think that while it is obviously very important to focus on how the US is and continues to handle this situation, it is also just as or more important to look at it from a broader, international stance. It is no longer even mildy reasonable to think that the US can function by itself in regards to business - far too much now depends on both the import and export of tangible and intangible goods, services, ideas, and business knowledge. Having the US government try to control and restrict trade within our national bounds when we now compete and participate in a worldwide arena is not a good solution in the least. Rather, the international business world needs to continue to strengthen and empower organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and run them in at least a relatively unbiased fashion. If everyoen is going to play together then we can;t have each country making up its own rules and complaining when they don't like someone elses. there has to be some sort of higher authority to go to and I think that for right now the WTO is a good starting point.
Bob, nice post. I never thought of things in the free market context. i like it.
I still stand by one belief: in reality, most Republicans WANT these illegals in their country.....it is in their business interest. I live in Arizona, where illegals are rampant. but in return, we get rapid development and growth, which is making the rich richer. Everyone knows this.
And, as i have said at least 30 times, anyone that wants to stop illegals, needs to fine the shit out of any business that hires an illegal.....but no Republican will stand for that (because it will cut into their real Savior: their wallet).
I haven't heard anything in these proposed bills that would address new immigrants coming in (besides building a fence, which is ridiculous). The bills are talking about what to do with the people who are here. That's great. But, if you allow them to be legal citizens, they will have to be paid a fair wage. Then, new immigrants will come in and work for less money, and the cycle continues. We have to address this issue on an on-going basis. The businesses have a huge role to play, as they are the real culprits here.
One of the poposals included fining immigrants $2,000 a year until they are citizens. What about the businesses? They should bear some of the burden.
I think this was a distraction because the Republicans know that the American people are starting to move away from their core issues of gay-bashing and anti-abortion, so they were looking for a new topic and they hoped the Democrats would become the villians because of our labor ties. It didn't work.
Darwal is right - this is an international issue. Unfortunately, the US has a hard time right now accepting advise from outside, including the WTO.
Right on terra. Just another Republican distraction.
FYI - Paul Hackett is filling in for Jerry Springer on Air America Radio today from 9-12. He's talking about immigration.
(I'm becoming less of a fan the more he yells at every caller about their opinions.)
Just thought it would be relevant.
Tough times for Cleveland fans of Springer the ax falling on his show in favor of local talked Bob Frantz. Frantz talks alot of local poltiics and issues - he is from Cleveland. After about a week I think he is center, leaning right a little when it comes to the issues.
The R's are the party of Gay issues and making lotsa dinero for their donors
period
I get Springer on the internet. He's the best one on Air America because he brings a calm, honest debate. (I do like Al Franken)
I know immigration is an important issue. I just don't understand the timing. No bill was expiring - nothing made this an urgent issue. I heard that they don't expect to have a resolution until winter. Why bring it up now? I really think they used it as a distraction, and to see which way they want to go on the issue. Democrats are the party of labor and diversity, so this is a tough issue.
We have to give the protestors lots of respect for keeping it peaceful. It was truly awesome to see 1/2 a million people marching peacefully!!
Post a Comment
<< Home