I think what's really getting lost in this Illegal Immigrant debate

[Nitrogenica]

is the simple fact that if an illegal immigrant can't find a job, they'll go somewhere they can get one. There must be an effort to crack down on the big business that exploits these people for their cheap labor.

One might think, considering the following chart, that greed is running our country.



Greed is in my opinion RUINING our country and it makes me SICK that this chart isn't making headlines. There's only so much money to go around. Cheap labor is another piece of the unconcious capitalism that Republicans love so much.

The worst part about it is they run as being RELIGIOUS PEOPLE!!! Since when was Jesus about unhinged greed and exploiting cheap labor?! Cripes this crap is going to change if it's the last thing I do. Enough is enough.

Our Country is mad, we've allowed the top 1% to ruin us. What the f*** are we going to do about it!!!

[babylonsister]

1. Amen, jhuth! nt

[sandnsea]

2. And dumping on immigrants will change this how??

:shrug:

[lindisfarne]

7. Two issues are relevant. 1)Not fair to those who follow laws and whose

immigration is delayed because illegals are given precedent with amnesty laws. What about the desperate economic and political situation of those waiting patiently in their own country of citizenship/refugee?

2) What about Americans for whom wages are driven down because employers can find someone cheaper?

The US cannot absorb all the people of the world who want to emigrate here. I think preference should be given to those who lawfully wait their turn. I realize it makes the situation of the illegal difficult, but those who are following the laws are in worse straits.

[Telly Savalas]

29. So market forces should be the sole determining factor of wages?

We can certainly waste billions of dollars forcibly removing millions of working people from the U.S. and hope that the tighter labor market will make wealth "trickle down" faster, pushing wages up 15 cents or so an hour, but wouldn't it be easier just to raise the minimum wage to a decent level instead?

[lindisfarne]

31. I would argue part of the reason min. wage hasn't been raised is

because due to a glut of free illegal labor, there hasn't been the pressure to drive up market wages, thus, no pressure to raise minimum wage either. If virtually everyone in the US was getting paid at $7.15 or higher, corporations would have less incentive to object to raising the minimum wage to $6.85/hour (not that some still wouldn't). But when there are people (illegal immigrants) willing to take the job at minimum wage (and even less, as many don't get all that is owed to them and they have little or no recourse, as well as finding it difficult to complain about safety and other violations at their place of work), corporations will fight any increase proposed increase in minimum wage, even when inflation has greatly eaten away at the value of the minimum wage due to years of no increase or inadequate increases.

(I don't believe anything in the message of mine that you replied to implied that I believed there shouldn't be a minimum wage (nor that it shouldn't be increased so that it has the buying power it had in the early-mid 1970's. Be careful about putting words in people's mouths).

[Nitrogenica]

8. I don't think we should "dump on them". These are people

who came here for jobs, plain and simple. They have families, children that were born here that are citizens.

Thousands of American companies advertized in Mexican newspapers to bring them here. It's well known businesses all over Minnesota did this.

The American business culture of greed is the problem.

The bottom line is ALWAYS the almighty dollar. The President fully encourages and supports this thinking. He was born into it, was raised to desire it, and every breath he takes is full of it.

[sandnsea]

22. Not everyone sees that side

And usually when I don't see anything about the immigrants themselves in an OP, it's just another dump on immigrants thread in disguise. Sorry if that wasn't your intention.

[treestar]

40. And they do not understand the US immigration laws. Hardly

any Americans understand even the basics of it.

[JuniperLea]

10. You can't save everyone in the world who is starving, homeless or needs...

a job when you (the US) are weak and without resources yourself.

We can't handle all we have now, white, brown, green, chartruese... makes no difference... where's the water going to come from? The food? The sanitation? The schools?

They have led us down this little garden path to divide and conquer and we fell for it.

[treestar]

25. Oh please, the poor Americans

But what made America rich was the ability to feed the capitalist engine.

Now the Mexicans are willing to do what the Irish/Italians/Southeastern Euros used to do.

[JuniperLea]

45. Sorry, you make no sense

What I'm saying is that all the money is at the top; there is no infrastructure or resources for "we the people"... how can we share what we don't have? We are living on the edge as it is... not enough potable water in our system, not enough health care, not enough sanitation, etc. Resources are limited and growing increasingly scarce every day.

Oh please my ass! Yes, poor Americans! We have more poor Americans than you can shake a dead cat at and we are expected to take care of more? If you want to work on distributing the wealth in this country, good luck to you. If you can get the 2% to let go of some of the 90% of our wealth that they cling to, then by all means, we could save a lot of people. Until that time, every person that comes here further stretches our resources. We are well on our way to becoming Earth's next third-world country.

[babylonsister]

19. I also didn't think this was 'dumping on immigrants'. You know

me better than that.

[sandnsea]

21. Have you looked at DU today?

Just one anti-immigrant thread after another.

[babylonsister]

24. Not me, ever. I wouldn't do that because I don't believe in that. nt

[Telly Savalas]

32. DU is becoming more inundated with right-wingers.

Not trolls seeking to stir shit up for fun, but rather conservatives who are fed up with Bush and looking for a place to vent.

That's my theory anyway.

[sandnsea]

35. Maybe

You sure never know what crazy idea is going to take hold around here anymore, that's for sure. I got used to some of the left wing fun and games, I kind of miss 15 Castro and Chavez threads a day. :)

[lindisfarne]

36. Are they anti-immigrant? Or are they pro-immigrant who follows the laws,

and anti-illegal-immigrant, who delay the visa for the want-to-be-an-immigrant person sitting in their home country, following the rules, and waiting in line for a visa so they can immigrate legally?

Are you against the people who follow the rules and apply for a visa? If not, why would you want them to have their visa delayed by illegal immigrants getting amnesty?

Do you honestly expect the US to be able to absorb every single person who wants to immigrate here? Wouldn't it be better for the US to follow policies which help the economies of other nations and help the workers of those nations (to get decent paying jobs in safe environments)?

[treestar]

41. If you are pro-immigrant who follows the laws what about

expanding the (very restrictive) laws we have now to include the people who are part of a natural migration? Are you for that? That would be the question, wouldn't it?

As for absorption, the US can absorb what the economy can absorb and if it really couldn't absorb them, would not attract them. There is a need for low wage labor that is obvious. If they were able to come legally, they would have to be paid legally, which would drive wages up.

When they can't get jobs they won't come.

They do not stop anyone who has a chance to come legally. The laws are so restrictive that those people are just lucky. They don't even have to have a job if they have the right US relative who can support them or has friends with enough money to support them. In fact, one way to come is to win a literal lottery (which you can participate in if you are from the right countries).

And why do those who qualify to come legally have to wait so long? Why doesn't that bother anyone? If it is so virtuous to come legally?

All the economic anti-immgrant sentiment either assumes a stagnant economy where the number and type of jobs never change and where the native born happen to fit into them. More jobs have been lost by being uncreated under that rationale than have ever been lost by being taken by an immigrant. Or it is just smoke screen for xenophobia.

All the legalism anti-immigrant sentiment assumes the present laws are rational and just. Generally it shows not knowing much about them. Not a single legal immigrant's case is impeded by the existence of illegals from Mexico getting over the border. They are just deportable, period. That does not affect any quota and certainly does not affect any bureaucratic processing.

[treestar]

42. In fact, I would not be surprised if the bureaucratic processing

got even slower to shift resources to expelling the illegals.

[lindisfarne]

43. There needs to be limits as to how many people can immigrate to

the US. Surely you don't think the US can absorb all the people who would like to come how. I would, however, be in favor of endorsing increasing the number of visas given to lawful immigrants if it meant we enforded immigration laws in the US (including labor laws, which should address your concern about them getting jobs ("When they can't get jobs they won't come.")

How does one define a "natural immigration"? How does one balance the percentage of citizens of Mexico (which I suspect would be included in your 'natural migration' allowed to get visas to immigrate against the percentage of citizens of India or China allowed to immigrate?

If you're so concerned about helping people, why are you giving preference to people with a "natural migration pattern" by which I'm guessing you mean people of North America (Canada) and Central America. But these people are by far not the most needy: citizens of many African countries, for example, are in far more desperate straits. It is discriminatory to make it so much more difficult for them to get visas by giving out far fewer visas to people from their countries (on a per capita basis), relative to the number given out to people from Mexico, for example.

"Comprehensive bill: Those pushing amnesty claim any bill must deal with both enforcement and illegals already here. But both amnesty and a promise of enforcement were offered in 1986. The amnesty attracted even more illegals while enforcement has faltered badly. A comprehensive law would first deal with enforcement, both at the border and against employers who hire illegals."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0329/p08s02-comv.html
(It doesn't really matter that * is playing semantic games by calling his program "not amnesty" - it is.)

[reformedrepub]

20. Its not dumping on immigrants

Sand,
I am a local Union officer, I am also the rep from my Union to the local CLC (Central Labor Council). If you arent familiar with what a CLC does, basically its a monthly meeting of leaders from all organized labor in a particular area. I am a state employee, the CLC meetings give me a chance to network with folks from: SEIU, Teamsters, Carpenters etc. The building trades unions have completely been decimated by Illegal Labor. Their livelyhoods are being destroyed by contractors who use cheap, illegal labor. The companies who employ Union Labor are not winning contracts for jobs, because they are constantly underbid by companies who use illegal labor. They simply cannot compete. I understand the human desire and need for people to feed their families and make a life for themselves, which is why I support making it much easier for folks to immigrate legally. But there are Americans being hurt by Illegal Immigration.

[joemurphy]

3. My answer is to tax the snot out of the rich. n/t

[Riverman]

4. WHAT IS LOST IN THIS DEBATE IS

That we are having this debate because like lemmings we (media, politicians and us sheeple)are persistently led into "debates" about who to blame for our current economic crises! When this one - immigration, slows down, they will come up with another group to blame - maybe next time those who waging war on Christianity! Now that one will invigorate the base, won't it?

[JuniperLea]

6. Exactly

We have fallen for their trap. Divide and conquer. If you want a crackdown on companies, you are called an inhuman racist... if you take any side of this issue, you are an idiot. Really. You are. They are pulling the strings and we are dancing.

[treestar]

26. Amen

I cannot believe how the Mexican immigrants have replaced the Arab terrorists.

[lwcon]

27. To take it a step further...

I don't even think it's about who's to blame for an economic crisis. For one thing, their story is that there is no economic crisis. They say we're soaring (like the Hindenburg).

This issue was just pulled out of their butts, and our lemming-like behavior is allowing this issue to occupy the front burner for no other reason than that the Repubs wanted it to.

What happened to trigger this? Did Elian Gonzalez sneak back into the country? Did we find out there was a connection between Al Qaeda and Fernando Valenzuela?

Gawd, they should just shut down the whole media, and just run one of those old Teletext type-on-screen systems, run straight from the White House.

Aaaaaarrrrggggghhh!

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[Telly Savalas]

30. Indeed. The U.S. has the highest per capita GDP in the world.

It's not the fault of immigrants that this wealth is so unevenly distributed.

[Imalittleteapot]

5. Totally agree!!!!!!!

Enforce the laws have been broken all of these years.

Look, I want everyone to have a better life, but many illegal immigrants = illegal slaves. Slave hours, slave pay. The immigration laws are broken to allow for bigger profits for whoever hires illegals. The laws are not enforced to protect greedy businesses.

[marmar]

9. That CEO chart...

makes me want to go outside (in the rain right now here in S.E. Michigan) and scream!

"I'm mad as hell and I'm sick of living in a corporate fascist country!"

:rant:

[Nitrogenica]

12. I got that from this months "Mother Jones" magazine on line.

An article heaped full of disturbing facts about America's culture of greed.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/exhibit/2006/05/perks_of_privilege.html

[peacetheonlyway]

23. 2nd Screamer - in Atlanta

I'm mad as hell and I aint' gonna take it anymore!

[Auntie Bush]

11. Raise up in arms...............? n/t

[FreakinDJ]

13. Sen Dorgen nails it

2005 Bush admin only prosecutes 1 employer
2004 Bush admin only prosecutes 3 employers for hiring illegal workers

[Nitrogenica]

14. Exactly.

They use to go after these businesses, but not anymore under Bush.

[Nitrogenica]

15. Here's some great examples of our wonderful American culture.

IN 1985, THE FORBES 400 were worth $221 billion combined. Today, they’re worth $1.13 trillion—more than the GDP of Canada.

THERE’VE BEEN FEW new additions to the Forbes 400. The median household income has also stagnated—at around $44,000.

AMONG THE FORBES 400 who gave to a 2004 presidential campaign, 72% gave to Bush.

IN 2005, there were 9 million American millionaires, a 62% increase since 2002.

IN 2005, 25.7 million Americans received food stamps, a 49% increase since 2000.

ONLY ESTATES worth more than $1.5 million are taxed. That’s less than 1% of all estates. Still, repealing the estate tax will cost the government at least $55 billion a year.

ONLY 3% OF STUDENTS at the top 146 colleges come from families in the bottom income quartile; only 10% come from the bottom half.

BUSH’S TAX CUTS GIVE a 2-child family earning $1 million an extra $86,722—or Harvard tuition, room, board, and an iMac G5 for both kids.

A 2-CHILD family earning $50,000 gets $2,050—or 1/5 the cost of public college for one kid.

THIS YEAR, Donald Trump will earn $1.5 million an hour to speak at Learning Annex seminars.

ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, the federal minimum wage has fallen 42% since its peak in 1968.

IF THE $5.15 HOURLY minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO compensation since 1990, it would now stand at $23.03.

A MINIMUM WAGE employee who works 40 hours a week for 51 weeks a year goes home with $10,506 before taxes.

SUCH A WORKER would take 7,000 years to earn Oracle CEO Larry Ellison’s yearly compensation.

ELLISON RECENTLY posed in Vanity Fair with his $300 million, 454-foot yacht, which he noted is “really only the size of a very large house.”
A World of Difference

ONLY THE WEALTHIEST 20% of Americans spend more on entertainment than on health care.

THE $17,530 EARNED by the average Wal-Mart employee last year was $1,820 below the poverty line for a family of 4.

5 OF AMERICA’S 10 richest people are Wal-Mart heirs.

PUBLIC COMPANIES spend 10% of their earnings compensating their top 5 executives.

1,730 BOARD MEMBERS of the nation’s 1,000 leading companies sit on the boards of 4 or more other corporations—including half of Coca-Cola’s 14-person board.

THE BIDDER who won a round of golf with Tiger Woods for $30,100 at a 2004 Buick charity auction could deduct all but about $200.

TIGER MADE $87 million in 2005, all but $12 million from endorsements and appearance fees.

THE 5TH LEADING philanthropist last year was Boone Pickens, in part due to his $165 million gift to Oklahoma State University’s golf program.

WITHIN AN HOUR, OSU invested it in a hedge fund Pickens controls. Thanks to a Katrina relief provision, his “gift” was also 100% deductible.

LAST YEAR 250 COMPANIES gave top execs between $50,000 and $1 million worth of wholly personal flights on corporate jets.

THIS PERK is 66% more costly to companies whose CEO belongs to out-of-state golf clubs.
A New Gilded Age

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT spends $500,000 on 8 security screeners who speed execs from a Wall Street helipad to American’s JFK terminal.

UNITED HAS CUT the pensions and salaries of most employees but promised 400 top executives 8% of the shares it expects to issue upon emerging from bankruptcy.

UNITED’S TOP 8 execs will also get a bonus of between 55% and 100% of their salaries.

IN 2002, “turnaround artist” Robert Miller dumped Bethlehem Steel’s pension obligation, allowing “vulture investor” Wilbur L. Ross to buy steel stock and sell it at a 1,000% profit.

IN 2005, DELPHI HIRED Miller for $4.5 million. After Ross said he might buy Delphi if its labor costs fell, Miller demanded wage cuts of up to 63% and dumped the pension obligation.

10 FORMER ENRON directors agreed to pay shareholders a $13 million settlement—which is 10% of what they made by dumping stock while lying about the company’s health.

POOR AMERICANS spend 1/4 of their income on residential energy costs.

EXXON’S 2005 PROFIT of $36.13 billion is more than the GDP of 2/3 of the world’s nations.

CEO PAY AMONG military contractors has tripled since 2001. For David Brooks, the CEO of bulletproof vest maker DHB, it’s risen 13,233%.

AT THE $10 MILLION bat mitzvah party Brooks threw his daughter last year, guests got $1,000 gift bags and listened to Aerosmith, Kenny G., Tom Petty, Stevie Nicks, and 50 Cent—who reportedly sang, “Go shorty, it’s your bat mitzvah, we gonna party like it’s your bat mitzvah.”

FOR PERFORMING IN the Live 8 concerts to “make poverty history,” musicians each got gift bags worth up to $12,000.

OSCAR PERFORMERS and presenters collectively owe the IRS $1,250,000 on the gift bags they got at the 2006 Academy Awards ceremony.

A DOG FOOD COMPANY provided “pawdicures” and other spa treatments to pets of celebrities attending the 2006 Sundance Film Festival.

ONE OF MADONNA’S recent freebies: $10,000 mink and diamond-tipped false eyelashes.

PARIS HILTON, who charges clubs $200,000 to appear for 20 minutes, stiffed Elton John’s AIDS benefit the $2,500-per-plate fee she owed.

ACCORDING TO Radar magazine, Owen Wilson was paid $100,000 to attend a Mercedes-Benz-sponsored Hamptons polo match. When other guests tried to speak with him, he reportedly said, “That’s not my job.”

[lindisfarne]

16. I stand behind what I said in my post #7 but I want to ask: just how does

Bush justify his statement that "there is a difference between those who crossed the border recently vs. those who crossed the border years ago". I guess there is some difference in terms of how settled the two groups would be, but in terms of the legality of crossing the border, I see no difference.

[Nitrogenica]

18. THere is no difference I agree. He's just fueling another dumb

talking point.

[Tim Osman]

17. We should deport

All Red Herrings Immediately!

[treestar]

28. So send them back to Mexico to starve then, I guess

Oh, those evil employers paying them to work!

[lindisfarne]

33. I doubt they would starve. What about all the (starving?) mexicans waiting

for their LEGAL visa in Mexico so that they can immigrate to the US? How is it fair that their chance at a legal visa is being delayed by the illegals?

[treestar]

39. It isn't. The immigration law does not work that way. They are lucky

they have a chance to become legal. The illegals have no chance to, ever within the laws we have, only exceptions like amnesty ever make them legal. Those in Mexico now who have a chance to become legal would be related to people who got amnesty earlier, most likely.

[lindisfarne]

44. I have more compassion for the people who try to do it legally;

and don't believe their chances at getting a visa should be diminished by the illegals getting visas.
Their economic situation is no better than that of the illegals (before they became illegals).

This is a ridiculous statement. If this is the case, why are there illegals? There are many, many people in Mexico who aren't willing to risk their life crossing illegally through the desert, and who don't have them means to raise the money to pay someone to "guide" (or more apt, abandon) them through the desert. Their only recourse is to try to do things legally.
"Those in Mexico now who have a chance to become legal would be related to people who got amnesty earlier, most likely."

(I also have a lot of compassion for Americans (virtually all of whom are immigrants!) whose wages have been driven down over the years because cheap labor prevents market forces from increasing wages to keep pace with inflation (as well as makes it easier for Congress to not raise minimum wage).

[Bridget Burke]

46. Yes, because they can afford lawyers....

And why have compassion for those who can't?

[lindisfarne]

47. I know people who got visas without lawyers. The process doesn't

require a lawyer. And the amount many pay for someone to "guide" them through the desert to enter the US illegally is more than an immigration lawyer costs.

[Tiggeroshii]

34. Umm

It's a tad more complicated than that in my humble opinion, but you are right. The thing with the possibility of citizenship most likely willl lead to companies now exploiting them for cheap labor to stop exploiting them once they are legal. They are exploited, abused, raped and killed in this country because of their status and getting rid of that status as long as they are in this country is the first step to end that abuse.

[rman]

37. Same big business that pushes for NAFTA etc,

which created the circumstances that cause illegal immigration in the first place. Big business benefits from it both in Mexico and in the US.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Well DUH!

When Bush actuaolly mentioned that in the speech, aka the IDs that will not be easy to fake (or rather will take longer), I went... his buddies at Walmart will not like this./

Then again actions speak louder than words... lets see if the internal enforcement unit is ahem, given its fangs back

[guidod]

48. You hit the nail on the head...

...I was talking to my brother this morning about how greed runs our Country. Dems should run their campaigns on this in 2006.

[primavera]

49. It's gone up

A couple of years ago CEOs only made 417 times what the average worker made, now it's up to 475 in just the space of a couple short years. That shouldn't come as any surprise given the administration's aggressive leave-no-millionaire-behind programs, but it kind of takes one's breath away to speculate, if the rate of increase in CEO compensation continues, what that multiple will be a couple of years from now. 500 times? 600? More?