My thoughts on immigration reform

[Recursion]

"Amnesty" is the wrong word.

If you can give up everything you've ever owned, leave everyone you know, smuggle yourself into this country, and make a life for yourself, you don't need "amnesty". You are an American. You don't need our forgiveness, you need our thanks. You are exactly one of the people who has always built this country, and the fact that we aren't greedily sucking you into our population is a sign of how far from our guiding principles we have come.

Fuck "amnesty". Have Congress issue immediate citizenship and a certificate of thanks to every hard-charging, rule-breaking, do-what-it-takes son-or-daughter-of-a-bitch who got here and made their own life because, ladies and gentlemen, those are "real Americans" in a way that those of us who were born here can never be.

[davidpdx]

1. I kind of agree

The word "amnesty" is a loaded term used by the right to rile people up. I am in favor of trying to bring as many people as possible out from the shadows and give them the tools to become a resident and then citizen.

Where I am conflicted is what happens after that. Assuming that all the people who could apply and are accepted (which I'm assuming there would be a period of time under which they would have to do that), where do we go from there?

[JayhawkSD]

2. My neice is a legal immigrant

She became engaged to my nephew and waited almost two full years for permission to enter this country legally. She has, I think understandably, problems with the idea that people who didn't wait, people who broke the laws which she honored, would be granted the same ststus which she waited so long to obtain. Two years waiting to be united with the man she was to marry, so that she could be in compliance with the law of her adopted country, only to see that that country does not itself honor that law.

[Ron Obvious]

5. I'm a legal immigrant too.

I feel the same way your niece does. Most of us do. Open borders is a suicidal policy for anyone who supports labour rights. Libertarians and right-wingers like nothing more than expanding the labour pool to destroy unions, and make sure the race card gets played whenever somebody objects to stagnating and disappearing wages and worsening working conditions. Look at what's been happening to a lot of blue collar jobs that once paid decent wages and which allowed a step up to the middle class for their families.

It was Reagan and Bush II who were big champions of amnesty after all.

Either you're for open borders, or else you think the US, like any other country in the world, has the right to control who it lets in. You should see how Mexico treats its illegal immigrants from Central America for comparison.

[pampango]

8. "Open borders is a suicidal policy for anyone who supports labour rights." Tell that to Europe.

Open borders are quite consistent with strong unions, a strong middle class and an equitable distribution of income which are all supported by European liberals. Open borders do require an element of political and economic integration with other countries that Americans are generally unwilling to even consider.

France and Germany have open borders with each other despite being historical enemies. The US and Canada cannot do the same even though are historically friendly with each other.

[Ron Obvious]

9. The EU zone

The free movement of labour in the EU zone is extremely unpopular with most people in the west because of the influx of all the cheap but well-educated labour from eastern Europe, particularly Poland, but Bulgaria and Romania are about to be added to the mix. Europeans have labour protections and a social safety net we can only dream of here, but both are threatened.

The differences between, say, Germany and Poland aren't nearly as big as those between the US and Mexico (I used to live in El Paso), and we don't have those labour protections and social safety nets they do in Europe.

Some 2 billion people in the world live on about 1 or 2 dollars a day. Do you really want to compete with them for jobs?

[pampango]

10. Most of the opposition to the free movement of labor in the EU comes from the far-right.

The far-right in Europe is "anti-immigrant, eurosceptic and nationalistic". Examples are UKIP and the BNP in the UK, National Front in France, Golden Dawn in Greece, Freedom Party in the Netherlands though practically every European country has one.

http://webapps.aljazeera.net/aje/custom/EUfarright/index.html

The differences between Germany and Poland when Poland joined the EU in 2004 were larger than you may know. Germany's per capita income then was $28,700 while Poland's was $12,000. (They are $38,400 and $20,600, respectively now.) German's income was 2.4 times that of a Pole in 2004. (Now the difference is 1.8 times so the difference is narrowing.)

US per capita income now is about $49,000 and Mexico's is 15,800. An American's income is 3.1 times that of a Mexican. So the multiple of US income versus Mexican is a little more than was the case of Germany versus Poland in 2004 but not as different as you might think.

All that said, no one on the left or right expects that the US and Mexico will eliminate their border. Heck the US won't even consider doing that with Canada where the per capita income is about the same as in the US. In fact under Bush we increased passport requirements for travel between the US and Canada. Americans just have a different attitude towards borders than Europeans.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=67&c=pl&l=en

"Some 2 billion people in the world live on about 1 or 2 dollars a day. Do you really want to compete with them for jobs?"

What do you suggest? That we wall them off so that their poverty does not affect us? The EU does not do that. They have one way 'free trade' for the poorest countries in the world so that their exports can enter Europe without tariffs.

Or perhaps we should tell the world's poor that they should just sell stuff to other poor people (kind of a "pull yourselves up by your own bootstraps" advice) and stop bothering us. I don't support those who suggest that American poor should just 'bootstrap' themselves out of poverty. Neither do I support those who want poor in other countries to do that.

I suppose that rich Americans who make 10, 100 or 1,000 times what I ever made, would like there to be a law prohibiting me (and my children and grandchildren) from competing with them (and their children and grandchildren). I don't think there should be any such law. Though I am, in their view I'm sure, a member of the 'great unwashed', non-rich masses of America (who outnumber the rich at least 1,000 to 1), I believe that I and my family should have the right to compete with the rich and their families on as level a playing field as is possible.

As I said, no one can realistically propose open borders with Mexico. No one can seriously even propose such a thing with Canada which in terms of population and prosperity is similar to California. I wonder sometimes that if 'open borders' between our states wasn't in the constitution that some would not suggest immigration controls and tariffs between states. The difference between Mississippi's per capita income ($37,000) and that of our upper-income states (around $70,000) is similar to the difference between Poland ($20,600) and Germany ($38,400). If European conservatives want restrictions on the movement of Poles, I imagine that American conservatives would want restrictions of the movement of Mississippians if that were not constitutionally protected.

[Ron Obvious]

11. A couple of points...

First of all, the rise of the right wing in Europe is in direct response to the massive immigration levels of the last few decades. No mainstream political party wanted to address the issue, either because they were afraid of being called bigots, or because they really love cheap labour (the neo-liberals). Anybody expressing concern about whole towns (Birmingham, London, The Hague, Berlin) becoming majority immigrant within a generation was instantly labelled a bigot, but those incredibly rapid changes are just not healthy for a society.

Few Europeans would admit to negative feelings about immigrants in public, but talk to them after a few pints about what everybody can see, and you'll hear about their frustrations, and how no political party cares about their concerns. When the economy sours further, as it will under austerity, this will intensify. Not addressing these issues will drive a lot more people into the arms of the extreme right.

It's not that the right wing created the anit-immigrant feelings, it's the other way around.

As for Mexico, GDP per capita doesn't tell the story. There is plenty of money in Mexico, including tremendous oil wealth, but it's in the hands of just a few families. Merely dividing the whole wealth of the country by its population is very misleading. I've been to Poland and I've been to Mexico. There's no comparison: Mexico is far, far poorer.

I'd have no problem with an open border with Canada, actually. I'd fear a race to the bottom in Canada though, as Canadian companies would have to compete with companies in the US that can treat their workers like shit.

[pampango]

12. "It's not that the right wing created the anit-immigrant feelings, it's the other way around."

I would not argue otherwise. It is always the case that the anti-immigrants gravitate to the right-wing parties. Liberals have always been more pro-immigration than conservatives in the US and Europe.

"Not addressing these issues will drive a lot more people into the arms of the extreme right."

I don't want liberals to adopt the extreme right's position on immigration (or any other issue) as a tactic to avoid driving "a lot more people into the arms of the extreme right". The idea is to bring society around to liberal ideas not to beat the extreme right to the conservative ideas.

Income inequality in Mexico is very bad. Of course it is very bad in the US, also. Income equality is much better in both Poland and Germany. So the income disparities are similar between Mexico/US and Poland/Germany while income inequalities are similar with each pair. I agree that Mexico is far poorer than Poland but comparison of Mexico/US and Poland/Germany is still valid. Americans are much more afraid of Mexicans than Germans are of Poles.

It's not Canada that tightened passport requirements under bush. It was the US. Canada apparently is not as afraid of us as we are of them, even though we have 10 times their population. And, of course, Canadian companies already have to compete with US companies.

[RobertEarl]

3. Illegal aliens

That's the problem. Defining people who want a better life and come to this great country seeking it, as illegal is dastardly.

When they come across the border they should be issued papers. From that time on they can officially prove to the community that they are here to have a better life and not be a criminal.

After a certain time they should be issued secure freedoms like those of us that were lucky to have been born here enjoy.

Like you say, immigrants are what built this country, or as the Native Americans might say, destroyed it!

[dkf]

4. Do you know what an unlimited supply of labor does to wages?

If you never want wages to rise then this is a good strategy.

[Recursion]

6. There's not a limited supply of labor to be done

That's the myth we need to slay.

[dkf]

7. Maybe if we expect the Government and its unlimited funds to provide those jobs...

But in the reality of today there is a whole lot of excess labor and a dirth of jobs.

Moreover who will work harder? Someone who risks everything to cross the border and will toil in the godforsaken heat for hours on end and starves without income or your average unemployed American who has food stamps and a safety net?

Our workers don't stand a chance.

At the upper end, people who have attained their degrees or have put blood sweat and tears into creating their own business can compete as they've shown they can put in the work. But your average dropout doesn't have the work ethic that people who risk their lives to cross the border do.