The USA's Love/Hate Affair with Illegals

[dugaresa]

I just don't get it.

Americans just love to hate "those illegals".

However what brought them here? The corporate as well as the average american's love of a good deal.

So long as Juan and Maria are willing to sneak over the border to work in a slaughterhouse for below minimum wage, watch someone's kids, clean up their homes or offices, or landscape their yard, they are "welcome". But later at the backyard barbeque they are the object of derision even as someone stands on a patio built with illegal labor.

It makes me sick. Jobs that Americans won't do? Bullshit. They are jobs that people don't want to fork out real cash so that a legal US citizen can make a house, car and grocery payments. But for someone who has no options and who comes from a country where living in a shed without electricity or plumbing on some US Farm is a step up from where they lived south of the border, well any bit of cash helps them get a bit closer to their dream. They will swallow humiliation and the looks of disdain and just do what they can do to make it better for their kids (just like most of our grandparents did). They are men who will stand at corners and jump in trucks to work all day at some middle class home putting in new shrubs and helping to build a deck and then they have to cross their fingers that the homeowner or the site boss will pay them and not call the authorities to send them back to square one.

Used, abused and treated as if they are less than human and to top it off, if they get sick or hurt it seems that people are okay with letting them die.

Well perhaps one bit of atonement we can have for the sins of taking advantage of these folks is letting them perhaps get a bit of free healthcare? But nope, they are being upheld as "abusers" of our medical system, ain't that a laugh.

[ComposMentis]

1. Temporary worker visas?

Agreed. I think... Surely we could come up with a system to allow workers in with some protection against abuse.

Farmers counted on them and/or abused them for decades. We still let them in with no protections whatsoever.


CM

[treestar]

34. They should all have visas - that would make the "legal"

the reason they get the jobs would disappear. They could have legal standing.

Though some businesses would close because they could not afford the employees, or shrink because they can't afford so many.

Still if they could legally cross the border, they could go home for health care. The way it is now they stay put because it's so much trouble in time and expense to sneak over again.

[Hello_Kitty]

62. Not temporary and no "guest worker" bullshit either.

So-called guest worker programs might as well be called Jim Crow worker programs because it's just a way to create an underclass of indentured servants. If we really need the workers then they should get a visa that gives them a path to permanent residence or citizenship, if they so choose. And no visas that are tied to only one job so that employers can hang the threat of deportation over their heads. They need to be portable. Also, immigrant workers should be 100% free to join unions.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. I have a better idea.

How about they're not here. How about they're landscaping and getting healthcare in their hometowns?

Landscaping is a decent gig. Tree planting is a decent gig. Logging is a decent gig. These are all jobs that citizens will do, provided there wasn't an infinite supply of labor available at less than minimum wage and who cost nothing in ancillary costs (such as L&I) because they all work to one degree or another under the table.

Labor laws are a sham when there are 12 million workers who can't complain when employers violate them.

It isn't the illegal workers who are being exploited, it's the legal workers who either lost their jobs or have their pay systematically depressed.

For all the bitching about "mandates", I have far less trouble mandating that workers pay some part of their own care than I do mandating that they pay for the care of people who are brought in for the purpose of suppressing legal workers wages.

[ComposMentis]

3. Keep em out?

So you're saying we should close the border to all illegals? Ha.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. Uh, yeah.

That's kind of the whole point of a border.

[pampango]

14. That doesn't have to be the whole point of a border.

As European countries have joined the EU, they have opened their borders to each others' citizens. The border between France and Germany is still there, but it does not serve as a barrier to immigration or the movement of people, in general.

[lumberjack_jeff]

16. So the EU embraces the importation of cheap Russian labor?

Are you suggesting the EU doesn't have a border?

[pampango]

17. The EU has open borders with the 27 countries that belong to it. Russia does not. n/t

[Romulox]

18. But the EU still has borders. Still restricts immigration. Still doesn't have "free trade"

with every country on earth.

Your argument really founders because you can't account for this.

[pampango]

26. As the EU has expanded, as when Romania and Bulgaria joined in 2007, borders that were closed

are opened and trade that was regulated becomes free for the new member countries and the rest of the EU. What is significant is that the older richer members of the EU have not been afraid to allow poor countries like Romania and Bulgaria, which are poorer than Mexico, to join.

You're right that the EU still has external borders with immigration and trade controls. That is one reason that the poorer countries of Eastern Europe want to join. :) Once a member of the EU, their borders are opened up with the rest of Europe and they can trade freely with and immigrate to the other members of the EU. You may criticize the EU for maintaining external borders, but I commend them for expanding their membership to include the poorer countries of Europe.

Perhaps you misunderstand my position on external borders. Countries have every right to maintain a closed border, if that is their desire. The US has the right to do that. We also have the right to elect repubs, defeat health care reforms, give tax breaks to the rich, etc. Just because you have the right, doesn't make it right.

The rich countries of Western Europe, though they too have the right to maintain closed borders with their poorer Eastern European neighbors, have made a very progressive decision not to do that. They have chosen instead to gradually, but consistently, open their borders to more and more poor neighboring countries and allow free immigration and trade. Of course, Europeans have also been progressive enough to make sure they have good health care, social safety nets, progressive taxation, and corporate/market regulation.

Maybe there is a lesson there. Perhaps progressive societies are not as afraid of their poorer neighbors (indeed seek to gradually bring them into the "family"), while societies without progressive protections for their citizens are rightfully worried about losing the little they feel they have left. As I've said before, I think that is why the US will always have a closed border (at least as closed as we can make it) with Mexico. I don't think you have anything to worry about there.

[Romulox]

42. So let's pitch EU membership for Mexico. It's an idea whose time has come!

Why in the world not? It would be a "very progressive decision", and, after all, Mexico's problems are the echoes of European colonialism.

[pampango]

60. They seemed focused on Europe for now, but I like your thinking!

My impression is that they're hung up on unifying the continent for the time being, but once they wrap that up, who knows.

Of course, we might need to come up with a new name for the European Union if we're going to convince them to allow Mexico in. :)

[enid602]

31. China and Europe

China exported 238 billion EUROS to the EU in '08, vs $337 billion to the US. Chinese exports to Europe are growing much faster than those to the US. The EU balance of trade deficit with the Chinese was137 billion EUROS in ´08. Guess they like to be poisoned too.

[Romulox]

43. Does it follow from this that the US may not have an immigration or trade policy?

:shrug:

[enid602]

47. EU

I was merely countering the earlier poster´s contention that the EU does not engage in free trade.

[Romulox]

48. That was me, and the EU doesn't engage in "Free trade" with all nations on earth

Your post doesn't prove that it does, either. :hi:

[enid602]

50. China

If they were truly restrictive in their trade policy, they would not have such an imbalance with China. Remember, 40% of China´s reserves are in EUROS, and that does not include Chinese holdings in Kroner, Sterling, Swiss Francs, etc, which are the currencies of EU members who have not yet adopted the EURO. Nafta, Cafta et al are not responsible for our trade imbalance and resulting loss of manufacturing and jobs.

[treestar]

33. The border is "closed." If it were "open" they could come legally

They sneak over it. They've done it for fifty years. It's apparently not possible to do much about it. Too many people over a very long border.

[dugaresa]

4. I understand your point and to be honest I would think they would rather stay at home

the sad fact is their own countries are a mess and the US for all our "spreading/defending of democracy" ignore the problems of the nations south of us that are so miserable to live in that the people there risk everything to get here.

but then again, the situation works to the advantage of the folks who hire them here.

it is just an ugly situation.

[ComposMentis]

7. Then we should...

So lets continue berating each other, rather than finding real solutions. I love trashing people as much as anyone, but it doesn't really do any good.

This is an issue close to me - I've lived in many central american countries and see the problems - and your rant doesn't do any good at all.

[dugaresa]

11. i am not trying to trash anyone

[Hello_Kitty]

63. What do you suggest then?

Continue to allow the degradation of the economies of other countries and continue to allow exploitation and wage suppression here? Don't say anything about it because it's just so...unseemly. Besides, "those people" love to pick our tomatoes and lettuce for us! You don't want to pay $5 a head for lettuce do you? :sarcasm:

[lumberjack_jeff]

9. I don't disagree that their own countries are often a mess.

My neighbor's house is like that. Nevertheless, I feel no guilt locking my door, and requiring that they at least ask for that cup of sugar.

The working class in the US aren't the ones responsible for the political situation in latin america.

Routine healthcare in Mexico is less than the insured expect to pay out of pocket.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/11/13/california_health_costs_send_patients_to_mexico_facilities/

[EFerrari]

79. Um, your federal government is largely responsible for the instability

in Latin America and in particular, in Mexico. Thank you, NAFTA!

Funny thing: every time someone like Chiquita feels threatened by too much democracy in one of those countries, a Honduras happens and with US aid.

We pay to kill democracy over there so Chiquita can keep raking in the money and we pay again when those people have to flee an unlivable situation and wind up here with no papers.\

And, btw, if you were arrested and deported on pay day instead of paid, you'd feel pretty abused I bet.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. Of course, a major cause of their contries being such a mess is the

predatory trade practices of the US - Mexican farmers may have never been well off, but they were a lot better off before NAFTA made their farms so unprofitable that they couldn't keep them going. What do they do? They head north where they can get real pay.

We create the conditions, then deplore the results.

[Romulox]

19. Many of the same people championing open borders champion corporate "free trade"

Check upthread, for example.

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. I checked upthread. I didn't see it.

I, personally, champion open borders and FAIR trade, not free trade. Free trade, as understood by the neo-liberals, is nothing more than economic colonialism, undermining the other nations' economies to provide cheap labor for ourselves.

Fuck that.

[Romulox]

23. Here's a website that champions just such a view.

http://www.uschamber.com/

It's also the POV of several prolific DU posters on this topic.

[pampango]

30. I wonder how long the US Chamber would survive in the EU before its head exploded from

being surrounded by progressive laws and regulations. Not long I bet. :)

[Hello_Kitty]

65. You know how they're able to have all those progressive policies, pampango?

Wages that are high enough to support the tax base.

[pampango]

66. I believe that they started most of their progressive policies in the 1950's and 1960's,

as they began to unify the continent and open their borders, while they were still recovering from WWII and while we were at the height of our postwar economic prosperity relative to the rest of the world. So they were able to initiate their push for progressive policies at a time when US wages were much higher than theirs.

I would certainly agree that their progressive policies have helped greatly to preserve their high wages and tax base.

[Hello_Kitty]

68. So maybe we should implement, or re-implement, those progressive policies here

BEFORE we outsource jobs or bring in immigrant labor, wouldn't you agree?

[pampango]

69. Europe developed their progressive policies at the same time that they were opening borders

and expanding trade and immigration with each other. They didn't build their progressive societies by building walls and cutting off trade with each other.

[Hello_Kitty]

70. Which is fine because they were pretty much all in the same position.

Therefore the trade was on a more equal footing.

[pampango]

71. If you're looking for a reason to say "It's different this time, so building walls is a good idea",

that may be the best argument you can come up with.

Europeans built progressive societies and opened their borders to each other when they were all relatively poor. Now they maintain those progressive societies while they are relatively wealthy and they have gradually, but steadily, opened their border to include their poorer European neighbors (some whom are poorer than Mexicans) into what is in effect a European free trade and open immigration zone.

In the US, on the other hand, we are working to build a more progressive society with national health care, progressive taxation, effective social safety net, and market regulation, but we have the problem of being richer than many of the countries we are trading with. That's something Europe didn't have to deal with after WWII.

Plus through much of our history we've been kind of able to do our own thing with two big oceans isolating us from much of what went on in other countries, so we've developed that "We can do it by ourselves" mentality over the years. Europeans countries never had the luxury of being able to tell the rest of the world to just go away, "We have problems to solve here." They all surround each other, so it's harder to ignore what goes on across a border, since it often came back to bite them. Even in the World Wars we escaped the damage that Europe suffered through.

Americans are more individualistic than Europeans (probably to a fault) and it's easy, I think, for us to project that individualism onto our country. Many feel that as a country we should be able to solve our problems by ourselves without relying on anyone else, but also without anyone else having a say in how we do it. That's why closed borders and tariffs seem more "American" to me than "European". (It does get confusing. In Europe open borders and free trade with your continental neighbors is considered progressive. In the US many progressives consider closed borders and tariffs to be the progressive path to follow.)

So if you're looking for a rationale to support closing borders and hiking tariffs, that's the best I can come up with. :)

[Hello_Kitty]

72. If you're looking for someone to justify your support for cheap labor to, look elsewhere.

That's why closed borders and tariffs seem more "American" to me than "European". (It does get confusing. In Europe open borders and free trade with your continental neighbors is considered progressive. In the US many progressives consider closed borders and tariffs to be the progressive path to follow.)

Yeah, because we're the only country with borders and tariffs. :eyes:

Try just popping over to Europe or Australia and see if you can get a job.

[Hello_Kitty]

64. Totally. They live in Fantasy Land.

Where they think if they defend corporate globalization horseshit Tom Friedman or Bill Gates will stop by their house and give them a cookie.

[dugaresa]

29. and you are right, it is one big ugly cycle

[treestar]

35. That's a good point

A lot of people don't even know about that - and you can bet Lou Dobbs never discusses it.

[timo]

41. ?????

so who grows all the mexican farm crops that ends up on AMERICAN produce markets..its not the chinese!!!

[Kali]

20. we don't just ignore, we are a major FACTOR

[TxRider]

46. No think to it, they would definately rather stay home

And most desire to go back home as well if they can get far enough ahead to get enough wealth to survive back home.

[Xicano]

27. I have even a better idea

How about we stop our economic empire expansionism into their communities displacing them in order to feed our materialism?

As long as our economic empire displaces people to benefit us. I say we have a moral obligation to those people.

People like you seem to think might makes right. How else would you only be concerned with one side of this issue and not equally as concerned with the other side of this issue?

Its hypocrisy to sit here and complain about people coming here and not complain about our going over to their countries in a manner causing them to come here.

[lumberjack_jeff]

59. A) who says I'm not concerned about imperialism?

B)it is an overstatment to say that the cross-border differential in standard of living is a problem for which US workers alone should atone. The mexican government has happily persecuted the native population, (especially in Chiapas 40% of whom are malnourished), gleefully exploited labor and willingly degraded their environment without any prompting from us.
I don't feel the need to atone for GM or Monsanto's sins, nor for those of the wealthy mexican property owners who are funding the paramilitaries that displaced the peasants.

Q) who's the world's richest man?
A) Carlos Slim, who owns 8% of the Mexican GDP.

Q) what is Mexico's biggest source of foreign income?
A) Remittances. Mexicans working in the US sent home $18 billion in 2005.

Don't make your local contractor the only whipping boy for mexico's problems. US workers are taking it in the ass from Carlos Slim and his government.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. For workers, illegal or otherwise, it's a catch-22. Work for less, or don't work.

And, it's going to get worse as unemployment rises.

[ComposMentis]

12. Yes!

Yeah, that's kind of how it works, isn't it?

I'm trying to point out the idiocy of this whole thread - I see from your signature you don't think there should be borders, but everyone else here thinks all foreigners should be kept out.


That doesn't bother you?

[Romulox]

8. How are regular working people to blame for the actions of corporations?

We buy the cheap fruit because these same corporations have used illegal labor to drive wages down.

"Well perhaps one bit of atonement we can have for the sins of taking advantage of these folks is letting them perhaps get a bit of free healthcare?"

*I* need to "atone" for the sins of corporations by paying for their worker's healthcare? That will show 'em! :eyes:

[dugaresa]

10. but people would complain greatly if the price of those grapes and apples

went up to support living wages.

it is a twisted catch 22

[Romulox]

13. I don't think so. The cost of labor is a tiny % of the price. nt

[treestar]

36. Exactly. And they buy the stuff from China at Walmart

Overgeneralizing, but my point is the consumers will always take the cheaper product, regardless of whether their fellow Americans supposedly lose jobs due to it. It's pervasive and ingrained.

It's like those people who work for automakers who are upset when Americans buy Japanese cars. If the car is cheaper and runs as well, Americans will buy it, regardless of the fact that somewhere, somewhere else, some other American might suffer from that.

[Romulox]

37. You cannot rationalize a call for "compassion" with an appeal to Devil take th hindmost economics!

:hi:

[Caliman73]

53. Yep it is easier to demonize other victims of economic imperialism than to focus on the corporations

You said up thread that it is the undocumented workers' fault for accepting work for less and driving wages down for US workers. It is the corporations fault for exploiting the desperate people of other countries. However, if you want to continue fighting against fellow human beings who are exploited, that is your prerogative. It will definitely take the heat off of the corporations and allow them to continue this way.

[JonQ]

21. Why not send them home

then their home countries can deal with their healthcare costs, and we can start hiring americans.

All it would require is that we enforce the laws already on the books.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. All it would require is for employers to offer more than five dollars an hour

for the work.

Only illegals will work for that pay.

I say, instead of sending people who want to work out of the country, we send the people who want to stiff workers out of the country.

If the corporate ownership would offer fair wages the the foreign workers would have to actually compete for the work - and given the choice, any employer would rather hire someone who is rooted in the community and speaks the language at $10/hr than someone who has no background and can't understand what they tell them to do at $10/hr. Of course, offering $5/hr changes that equation.

US labor, instead of fighting the foreign workers, should be trying to UNIONIZE them.

[Romulox]

25. Without enforcement, all of that is for naught.

Unionize and naturalize every illegal worker tomorrow. By Monday, a new crop of illegal workers will arrive to undercut the newly unionized citizens.

As long as there is a group of people who may be mistreated at will, and a nearby open border, the problem will continue.

[JonQ]

39. Or just penalize employees that hire illegals

as well as deporting illegals.

Why should american companies be hiring illegal immigrant who are not allowed to be here? They don't have a right to compete for jobs here, at any price.

[Caliman73]

54. Well said

Politically and Economically, it benefits the corporations and right wingers to keep US labor fighting and the population fighting against undocumented workers. The fear card is always a political winner and corporations just keep on keeping on without any penalty. The moment you start really making it economically unfeasible for companies to hire undocumented workers, you solve the immigration and labor problem. Profit motive gets in the way though.

[lumberjack_jeff]

57. Wages are determined by the workforce.

Not employers.

If lettuce doesn't get picked at $5/hour, the wage goes up until someone will.

Employers can't arbitrarily say that roofing is worth $5.00 per hour, the local labor market does. So long as there is surplus labor, wages will be low.

Expecting unionization to play any positive role in improving wages within a infinite labor supply is stupid.

Unions were effective because they restricted the labor supply by scaring off scabs.

[WillowTree]

28. Things are so horrible for them here, it's a wonder that they come at all.

Sorry, but I want to see that we're taking proper care of our own citizens first. And then those who showed the US sufficient respect to comply with our immigration laws when they came to take advantage of the opportunities they found here.

Then maybe we can talk about what we're willing to give gratis to illegal aliens. Maybe.

[treestar]

32. If U.S. workers did the jobs, the products would be more expensive

Americans always want the lowest price.

Why does all the Chinese made stuff sell? If the same thing made by Americans costs more, Americans will take the cheaper price.

It is why mom and pop go out of business when Walmart comes. Americans go to Walmart because the same thing is cheaper.

The reason it is not fair to the illegals is that they are working without the protections the law gives the citizens, so we can have cheaper stuff, yet they get demonized for it. If they had visas and were legal they would not have the "advantage" over the U.S. citizens, who "won't" work for less than minimum wage and the other protections in the laws.

[Romulox]

38. You said upthread that the border cannot be controlled. So legalizing everyone already here

cannot possibly solve the problem. :hi:

[Orwellian_Ghost]

40. I strongly believe that they should close the border to Mexico.

On one condition, which is you close it not only to people but to resources.
If you say you want to close it to people but not resources, what
you're saying, one thing, is that you're a racist asshole, but another
thing you're saying is - I don't want you but I want the coffee that's
grown on the land that used to be yours.

Why is this migration taking place? It's not taking place because suddenly a bunch of people
from Guatemala decide they want to take an eco-tour of the strawberry
fields in the San Joaquin valley. It's because their communities are
being destroyed through the theft of the land. If you don't want these
people moving up here then don't steal those people's lands, pretty
simple solution.


Yes it is a xenophobic sleight of hand but it is used, as it has been for
centuries in America preceding Republican-Democrat nonsense, to point
the finger at the victim so as to keep the eyes averted from the
horrors being perpetrated upon those victims and to ignore or
rationalize the colossal banditry for the beneficiaries. The liberal
class is particularly hypocritical and criminally ignorant on this
point.

The problem is really quite simple as is the solution.

The problem: El Norte is pushing them there "illegals" off of his/her ancestral
lands so as to steal the resources that reside in Chiapas e.g.

The solution: Stop El Norte from stealing the resources of the people in Chiapas e.g.

NAFTA is merely the latest acronym-IMF the latest international
syndicate-World Bank only the latest MoneyChanger in this ongoing
colonial conquest.

Neither the employer or the "immigrant" are really the fundamental issue.

Qualifier:
Many who do employ "immigrants" exploit them and should be themselves
forced to work in the broiling hot sun for 14 hours/day or forced to do
backbreakingearlydeath work in the maquiladoras.

Let the truth be the frame.

[TxRider]

45. If the border could be closed it would have been

They are trying, but at 3000 miles of it, mostly desert, it's just not plausible.

The rest of your points are quite valid, but I would also add in corrupt and inept governments in their own countries.

[lumberjack_jeff]

56. They're not trying at all.

The social security administration knows exactly where many (if not most) of them work, and do nothing.

It would be unnecessary to close the border if there was any real likelihood that they'd get sent home, or better yet, if employers faced any kind of risk in hiring them.

[TxRider]

73. Agreed

We even passed laws to go after employers in Texas.

Totally unenforced though. Not even an attempt unless the company ruffles the wrong feathers.

Going after employers though is a hot button issue.

[JonQ]

61. If there was the political will to do so

it would have been closed.

[TxRider]

44. My take?

I've worked shoulder to shoulder with illegals, and hired them at times.

Jobs that people here won't do...

I don't know many who will work on replacing a roof in a 105 degree Texas sun.. Certainly no young people that I know personally. I did as a young man, but none of the young men in my family would.

Paying for health care...

Where exactly do people think the taxes go when they are withheld from a paycheck using a fake SSN?

The IRS certainly doesn't return that cash to the employer who sends it in.

In my state we have sales tax, and property tax, no income tax.

Do illegals not buy goods? Do they not pay rent so the landlord can pay his taxes from them, or buy property?

The only illegals that do not pay tax are short term day workers paid in cash. But I believe they are minority of the millions in the country.

In my experience illegals are some of the most honest, trustworthy, and hard working people around. Not all like any sector of society, but most.


And I'll end it with a story..

My father after he retired went to work for Raytheon, supervising airport construction.

When the contractors brought in Mexicans (I'm sure some were from farther south) he went to them and found one who spoke English. He called several over for an interview. They were scared shitless.

He asked about their employment, how much they were paid etc. and it was minimum wage. The contract as bid included costs of prevailing wage..

Long story short those illegals on that construction job got prevailing union wages and hours for the duration of the project, much to the anger of the contracting corporation, and boy did those guys love my dad.

I was a bit surprised because my dad has some pretty racist views, but he is a fair and honest man and does not take to wrong being done in front of him nonetheless.

[Romulox]

49. You don't have a right to cheap labor. Period. There are no "Jobs that people here won't do."

You just don't want to have to pay them.

"The contract as bid included costs of prevailing wage.."

A prevailing wage that is demonstrably lower than it would otherwise be because of competition with an unregulated workforce.

[TxRider]

51. And here I thought these illegals getting union wages was a good thing...

True enough though.

It was nice to see this company having to pay real wages when they tried to slip out paying only a fraction of what they told the FAA they were paying..

For jobs that Americans would definately do.

[lumberjack_jeff]

55. So did the "illegals" that you hired pay SS taxes on those earnings? n/t

[astral]

86. Fake ssn?

The employer knows it's a fake ssn. They do not send the money they take from the employee's paycheck to the IRS.

They probably don't bother to take any money out of the paycheck, the point was the cheap wage they got hired in the first place.
_____________________________________

"""""""Where exactly do people think the taxes go when they are withheld from a paycheck using a fake SSN?
The IRS certainly doesn't return that cash to the employer who sends it in."""""

[rubberducky]

52. What these people will put up with for a pay check is astounding.

Dugaresa, you have touched my heart. I saw first hand what these people were treated like. They are treated as less than human. The shacks that they live in without electric, heat, water, are unbelievable that this happens in this country. What I saw in Cal. with the way we treat fellow human beings I will never, never forget. How can anyone not call this a form of slavery? Yes, they are paid, but such a pittance should cause shame, but does not. Now, everyone seems very, very worried that these people will get any kind of medical attention, no matter what the ailment. Until our borders are sealed and this country allows these people to be used, it seems to me that we have a moral responsibility to these people that this country welcomed to pick thier tomatoes, but if they happen to suffer from heat stroke, we suddenly have no use for them.FYI, I`m not Hispanic or Mexican, but would be proud if I was. Sorry, for the long post, but your post touched a nerve.

[EndersDame]

58. Maybe we could have a humanitarian version of FTAA and NAFTA

stating that any worker in the Americas has to get paid a living wage and healthcare. I know that sounds like an unrealistic goal but I ccannot see realistically another way of stopping illegal immigration

[JonQ]

75. Better border security

increased efforts to track them down here, severe penalties for hiring illegals and mandatory background screenings for any new hires.

[asdjrocky]

67. It doesn't bother you that the term "Illegals" is considered an insult by many, many people?

How is a person illegal, please enlighten me. I won't read past the title of your post.

[JonQ]

74. When they are breaking the law

then they are illegals.

They can consider it offensive if they like, but it's true.

[asdjrocky]

80. So you're telling me you're an illegal?

Unless of course, you've never broken the law.

[JonQ]

81. When I am breaking the law then certainly I am

and I would get punished.

If I get pulled over for speeding I don't go in to a rant about how it's my right to speed, or mention "how can a person be breaking the law, that doesn't make any sense?". Nope, I pay my ticket and move on with my life.

These people are breaking the law, simply by being here, and they are doing it every second of every day that they are on american soil. So they are illegals.

Should they return to their home countries then they would no longer be illegals.

The people aren't illegal by their very nature or anything like that, but rather by breaking the law, repeatedly and with impunity.

I wonder, if someone wonders in to your house against your wishes, would you support their right to be there, or would you expect the police to remove them?

[Missy Vixen]

76. Ask the farmers of Eastern Washington

what happened to their crops after the last "illegals" crackdown. They rotted on the ground. There was nobody to harvest them.

Same goes for restauranteurs who are willing to look the other way while someone's washing dishes or helping in the kitchen.

We live on the West Coast. I'm betting I could walk into any privately owned restaurant right now in the Seattle area and find someone working that doesn't have a green card.

I'm much more worried about the H-B1 visa problem than I'll ever be about people crossing the border and trying to make a better life for themselves.

[JonQ]

83. And remember back in 65

1865 that is, when all those farmers had a heck of a time getting their cotton picked? Tragic.

Lincoln was maybe a bit premature in doing away with that cheap source of labor. I mean, there is literally no way to run a profitable farm business with the higher labor costs associated with free workers.

The temporary upset in social order, productivity, and increase in consumer costs far outweighed doing what was right.

[Yavin4]

77. Mexicans, Americans, and Canadians Should Be Allowed To Have Multiple Citizenships

Any person born in Mexico, the USA, or Canada should be allowed to apply for and be granted citizenship in any of the three nations.

If I want to live in Toronto, I should be allowed to do so without hassle. If trade can be opened up, why not citizenship?

[azbarq]

78. transform america via relaxed citizenship rules, increased immigration quotas, and an amnesty

I think americans have a right to hate illegals.
Most people do not want to see their neighborhoods transformed into something looking like another country, with signs in a different language etc.

Don't the wishes of the majority matter in a democracy?
And the dramatic changes wrought by mass immigration has caused a backlash and a rising conservative sentiment among americans all over.
The more they see their old neighborhoods changing from immigration, the more conservative most white americans get. See Dr Putnam's BOWLING ALONE research.

Plus, immigrants have driven down wages and put americans out of work.
THat's bad, right?

However, the huge numbers of immigrants could be put to a good purpose. Look at california, where the hispanic vote has apparently now made that state a solid blue state.

An amnesty could turn non-voting hispanics into voters, primarily democratic voters, and in combination with relaxed citizenship rules in combination with relaxed legal immigration rules, could turn many small states and texas into blue states.

This is one thing that infuriates me about the democratic party--they do not seem to realize that the importation of the immigrants without the immigrants being able to vote only makes the white majority more conservative.

An amnesty in combination with relaxed citizenship rules in combination with relaxed legal immigration rules, could turn many small states and texas into blue states. Why don't democrats talk about this?

And even more importantly, a relatively small number of new hispanic immigrant-voters could transform the senate into a solidly democratic body. The senate is made up primarily of small states, most of them in the west. States like montana, WY, ND, SD, UT, ID, etc, have such a low population that an amnesty and relaxed immigration and citizenship rules could quickly turn those states from solid red to solid blue. Because the population of those states is so low, my proposed changes above could mean that the population of those small states could quickly shift to minority white and majority hispanic, voting hispanics.

This would mean a blue nation! Don't democrats want this?


The real problem is that america is turning more conservative because of importation of non-voting immigrants. You don't seem to realize this. Either kick them out or get more of them and let them all vote. One or the other. Leaving the situation like it is....that is bad.


Open the borders to latin americans. And let them vote.
But let americans go to mexico, too. Maybe we could get cheap healthcare there. The way things are looking, we are sure not going to get it here. This obamacare is shaping up to be a boon for the insurers and healthcare companies and a burden to working class americans.

If we had a truly blue nation, we would not get triangulators like Clinton and Obama, but instead real leftists like Feingold.

[Iggo]

82. "Juan and Maria"?

Yikes.

[Jade Fox]

84. "They are jobs that people don't want to fork out real cash".....

Exactly.

We will never have a rational policy toward immigration as long as we secretly like and encourage having a starving class of workers to exploit.

[MellowDem]

85. It's not that surprising...

The corporate interests LOVE illegal immigration while all the rest of us hate it, though for different reasons. The right hates it for the loss of jobs, for sure, but it's also a lot because of racism, xenophobia, etc.

Dems can't stand illegal immigration because it is fundamentally anti-labor.

I can't say I feel a lot of sympathy for the illegal immigrants themselves. There are a lot of other poverty-stricken people from their country of origin that are trying to improve the country they live in. Indeed, they are willing to undercut American workers for less wages and lower labor standards for everyone. They work readily hand in hand with the corporate interests of America to make a less equitable society. They are a destabilizing force looking out for only themselves generally, and it is why illegal immigration is illegal in any country.

[astral]

87. The North American Union is COMING. Got it?

Our government, that is to say our U.S. government, before, during, and after President Obama, WANTS the North American Union, and they are going to GET it.

That means the prevailing wages in America are going to go DOWN to match the cheap wages of the illegal immigrants, because we are all going to be one big happy family. There will be no opportunity to be gained working north of this border nor any downside to working south of that border.

And, on another note that everyone here seems to be oblivious to -- there are lots of people coming across the border illegally besides people from Mexico. Our government is NOT ABOUT "America," nor the "United" States. They are about a single, all-powerful global government, "loyalty to country" be damned.

We are in the middle of a big change. Nobody's opinion is going to stop it.

Don't you think all the people on the streets who used to OWN their home (or, were in progress of owning it by payments) would take any job they can for any dollar amount while they are jobless? No? Maybe you should ask them.