Illegal immigration poll.

[Wcross]

I am trying to get a feel for what others think of the illegal immigration situation. My personal belief is that it should be stopped immediately. Those people in our country now illegally should be sent home to enter the U.S. through the proper channels.
I feel it is unfair to allow people to jump to the front of the line by breaking our laws. There are plenty of deserving people in other areas of the world who should be given the chance to immigrate.
Also, the surge of illegal immigrants puts a strain on our schools and health care facilities. They depress wages of American citizens by being cheaper to employ, no social security taxes, no medicaid taxes, no income taxes. A large portion of the wages earned in the United States are not spent here, the money is sent back to their home countries. It is a drag on our economy.
We have no idea who is walking across the border, most are good people in search of a better life. There are some that are flat out sociopaths. We must screen the people entering our country.

[treestar]

1. There must be peace in the middle east

with the immigration threads starting up again.

We need to revise the law to make it more realistic and consistent with life in the 21st century.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I'm convinced the two issues are related.

I do believe that Bush allowed this flood of Mexican immigrants to happen, but I assumed it was to help his buddy Vicente Fox. Now I see that Bush may have had bigger plans for these immigrants. Had things gone smoothly, he would have had his volunteer Army and would not have had to worry about disturbing the white boys & their families too much.

[Warpy]

2. Enforce the damn laws

against scumbag EMPLOYERS who hire illegals at less than the market wage, treat them like shit, threaten them with La Migra when they object to being treated like shit, and know they will never unionize and stand up for their rights as human beings.

FINE the cheap bastards. Make hiring illegals TOO EXPENSIVE to do. Enforce labor laws about safety, wages, basic decency.

The illegals aren't the problem. The scumbag employers ARE.

(I'm disappointed that polls like this are still appearing at DU, polls that focus on illegals as the bad guys. Shame!)

[Gormy Cuss]

41. I'd be in favor of deporting

those scumbag employers who are flagrant abusers of their workers. We don't need people like that.

[michreject]

55. You have to come from somewhere

to be sent back. Hit them in the pocketbook.

[Gormy Cuss]

65. I was being facetious.

On a serious note, I don't think hitting them in the wallet is enough. Jail time should be on the table for the worst offenders.

[TriMetFan]

67. Will said!!!

That is what I have been trying to say from the beginning of all this blame the illegals. That is why I had to take a step back from DU, because these kinds of polls are uncalled for. Where is the outrage about our AMERICAN COMPANIES that hire and are exploiting these poor people??? What so hard about enforcing the laws that are on the books already? So like I said, Will said.

[Xeric]

3. Yay! Another immigrant bashing thread!

Very progressive!.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. you aren't kidding.

I would guess that 99% of the people here are sons/daughters, grandsons/granddaughters or greatgrandsons/greatgranddaughters of immigrants. Don't most people realize that the vast majority immigrants (regardless of status) become law abiding citizens, who add, not subtract. to our society? Their education, their labor, their creativity, and their taxes (yes, they pay as much, if not more, in taxes than citizens) are assets, not detriments.


I am the son of two immigrants who suffered greatly before, during and after they arrived here. Language difficulties, overt and covert discrimination were commonplace. Yet, they hav done OK, and would not want to live anywhere else. I dare one person claim that their presence has not been an advantage, an asset, a benefit to America as much as America has been advantageous to them.

[Subdivisions]

11. Nobody's bashing immigrants. This thread is about

ILLEGAL immigrants.

My ancestors came to this country through Ellis Island, just as yours did. They did not come into this country ILLEGALLY.

The reason they come here is because their own countries cannot provide for them and I don't blame them for coming here. But it is the companies that hire them that are responsible for this problem.

And, before you start throwing fireballs at me, I am a 24-year, superintendent-level, project manager-level construction tradesman in Texas (my last job paid me $21/hour) seeking a simple grunt position and I haven't been able to get a decent paying job for going on two years.

Also, I am currently unemployed and have applied to over 100 companies and NOT A SINGLE ONE of them has hired me. But I can tell you this: when I go onto a construction site to apply for a job, I don't see any Caucasion or African-American workers anywhere in sight. Don't believe me? Go look for yourself.

[Xeric]

20. It is about bashing immigrants

Don't blame our healthcare problems on bloated hospital and drug companies with control over our politicians -blame the "illegals".

Don't blame our failing schools on the Republicans, who don't even want public education and who have systematically defunded it for years- blame the "illegals".

Don't blame the lack of good paying jobs on anti-unionism and "right to work" Republicans -blame the "illegals".

Don't blame the decline of the middle class on Republican policies that favor salary cuts for workers over huge perks and freebies for corporate CEO's -blame illegals.

Who benefits from this discussion?
Guess who?

[Subdivisions]

24. I absolutely do blame the Republicans...

I'm not blaming illegals for a god damned thing. They are coming here because Republicans are allowing them to come here. If I were them I'd jump the border too for the possibility of a better life.

Let me ask you, what do you do for a living? Is your job the type of job that Americans don't want to do? Apparently mine is.

[datasuspect]

23. the "ellis island" gambit is pure, unmitigated bullshit

immigration laws were very lax. sign some papers, pass a physical, and you were in.

there were nowhere NEAR as many obstacles to legal immigration as there are now.

your analogy says nothing.

[Subdivisions]

31. Doesn't matter whether my analogy says anything..

The disposition of anyone who comes to this country through any means other than the LEGAL process is an ILLEGAL immigrant and has broken the relevant laws of this nation. Period.

[datasuspect]

35. IT DOES MATTER

because you are trying to accord a different moral status to your GOOD immigrant ancestors compared to those BAD brown ones.

when you use a bullshit analogy, it makes what you say meaningless and points out the hypocrisy of your position.

as to the law: it was illegal for blacks to drink out of white people's water fountains in much of the american south, so laws, in this sense aren't etched in granite. laws often betray the particular biases of a culture at any given time.

laws are fluid, not absolute.

[Subdivisions]

45. So you think I'm simply a racist?

I guess that nullifies the love and care I've demonstrated for my FIVE Mexican-American stepchildren I've helped their mother to raise for the past seven years.

I guess that nullifies all the wonderful friendships I've had with people of Hispanic descent.

And, I guess that your trade, whatever it is, has not been adversely affected by the influx of illegal immigrants as it has mine.

I guess I shouldn't have gotten tangled up in a trade that Americans don't want to do.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Subdivisions]

53. OH! Ok!

The xenophobia gambit.

Apparently you do not have to compete with immigrants of any sort in order to feed and house your family. You are lucky.

[datasuspect]

58. you have to compete?

have you been in a decision-making capacity in the construction industry?

made decisions that affected budgets? you've had fiscal oversight on projects right?

how many "hands" get to do that?

how many latino immigrant superintendents do YOU see on any site?

how are you competing with laborers?

you might be a victim of ageism and not scary mexicans.

[Subdivisions]

84. If you will go back and read my post., I said

I can't even get a job as a "grunt".

Yes! I have to compete! Everyone cannot hold the same supervisory position. If there is no Supervisor position available, then I have to compete for the grunt positions. Just because I can and have run jobsites doesn't mean that I can sell all my tools. More often that not, I have to strap on my toolbelt just like any other grunt.

There is usually only one "Super" on any given job. When I go onto a jobsite and apply for a job, it is the supervisor who considers me for the job. Which means THAT supervisor position is filled. You are correct that nearly ALL positions above that of grunt are held by white males. That's has nothing to do with me nor can I do anything about it.

You seem to have misunderstood my statement. I don't apply exclusively for supervisor positions. I apply for a JOB. On my last job, I was a foreman. The one before that I was a hand. The one before, foreman. I accept whatever position is available on a given project.

What I was trying to get across by including "superintendent-level" in my statement was to emphasize my level of experience in my particular trade. I can supervise an entire project, but only if that position is available. If it is not, of course I would be applying as a regular hand. I am not exclusively applying for a supervisor position. I'm applying for whatever I can get. Which means that 99% of the time, the position for which I am applying, grunt, is the very position for which I have to compete with an immigrant that is willing to accept 1/3 of what me and my contemporaries were getting.

You apparently have absolutely no idea what it is like to see jobsites full of immigrants, legal or otherwise, while you are trying to scramble to find a job so that you can take care of your family and pay your bills.

Come walk a mile in my shoes and the picture will become crystal clear to you.

I'm not a racist. I'm not a bigot. I'm a 42-year old American taxpayer that has been in the same trade since I'm 18 years old. I can't find a job. But, somehow, all those immigrants on all of those construction sites I've been to can.

[datasuspect]

85. work offshore

there are plenty of outfits out there that can use someone with your experience constructing rigs.

you might have to compete with TPNs from india and britain though.

[Subdivisions]

87. You have absolutely no sympathy for

my predicament.

To suggest that I change to accommodate a foreigner is appalling.

[datasuspect]

89. sympathy is in the dictionary between sex and syphilis somewhere

there is work to be had out there for construction people/tradesmen, like i said, plenty of construction people have cross-applicable skill sets that work in the oilpatch, on and offshore.

that's where the money is now anyway.

work smarter, not harder.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

190. and empathy no longer exists.

that much is obvious.

[datasuspect]

193. i can empathize

but i don't buy it.

a management-level employee seeking grunt-level work IN ANY INDUSTRY is gonna have a hard go of it, ILLEGAL ALIENS NOTWITHSTANDING.

the average hiring decision maker will think that this "management-level" person might sky up when a better offer comes around. that's why this person is having difficulty finding work, not imaginary illegal aliens.

i'm not going to automatically dispense sympathy just because SOMEONE on the INTERNET posts a fishy tale of woe.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

204. i hear ya.

what has happened is that the neocons snuck up on us. Sure, we heard their claims of wanting to destroy government, to alter the face of amerika, to remove entire aspects of the status quo (ante this, condi) but we made the almost fatal mistake of not believing that they really REALLY meant it.

what we see as destruction, pain, poverty and unnecessary death, they see as opportunity.

and that is the saddest thing of all. One, our short-sightedness, and two, their craven greed and destruction.

[EFerrari]

88. So your beef is with immigrants, "legal or otherwise".

When it should be with management.

[Subdivisions]

90. As I said before...

I don't blame the immigrants. I blame the companies that hire then and the Republicans that refuse to secure our borders.

[EFerrari]

95. But you describe a physical reaction when you see them at job sites.

Sure.

[Subdivisions]

104. Apparently, you would rather see this American

put in the very same position as those people who feel their only option is to enter this country illegally so that they can support themselves and their families.

Tell me. Where can I go so that I can support myself and my family?

According to the results of the poll so far, you are in the minority. In a democracy, you lose.

[EFerrari]

106. God forbid you should feel the same hunger as "those people".

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

110. No, I'm a very good reader, hermanito. n/t

[Critters2]

175. It's the brown people meme!

As reliable as red leaves in autumn. But less meaningful.

[proud2BlibKansan]

170. So let them starve then

They should know better than to come here and immediately break our laws. They need to stay where they belong and if they starve, they starve. It certainly is not our responsibility to feed them. :sarcasm:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

80. exactly what i was going to state.

and besides, my parents didn't come through Ellis Island. It had been closed by then. They were WWII refugees. and even then, the process was a hell of a lot simpler and more fair.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. Demonizing the immigrants doesn't help your case

They come here illegally because it is nearly impossible to immigrate legally from Central America. They are desperately poor. If you had kids to feed and had to choose between letting them starve and breaking the immigration laws to provide for them, I am willing to bet you would break the laws. I know I would.

Yes the companies who hire them need to be held accountable. So let's focus on THEM and stop blaming the workers they are hiring.

[Subdivisions]

48. ...

The reason they come here is because their own countries cannot provide for them and I don't blame them for coming here. But it is the companies that hire them that are responsible for this problem.

I'm not demonizing them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

166. I would argue that you are demonizing them

with statements like this:
My ancestors came to this country through Ellis Island, just as yours did. They did not come into this country ILLEGALLY.

Your ancestors were able to come here legally because immigration laws were much different. It is no longer easy for Hispanic immigrants to come here legally; this is why they do so illegally. So it really isn't fair to hold them up to standards that are 100 years old and no longer exist.

When your ancestors came through Ellis Island, they were welcomed and allowed to enter the US. That's not how it works anymore.

[datasuspect]

27. 24 year superintendent?

hmmm. . .

that puts you in your mid 40s, early 50s?

how many latino superintendents/bosses/money men do you see on ANY site?

might be a problem with your age or other factors you aren't listing here.

[FILAM23]

30. The difference is

my immigrant great grandparents, my immigrant wife followed
the laws that were in place at the time. Many of todays immigrants
break the laws, therefore they are criminals and must be treated as such

[datasuspect]

32. yes and the laws your ancestors followed posed NO REAL

obstacle to their emigration.

just get here and sign up.

the analogy says nothing.

[proud2BlibKansan]

37. The laws didn't discriminate against your ancestors,

now did they? Today the laws favor white Europeans.

[Quantess]

140. Do you have any links for that?

I know that immigrants from other continents often have a very challenging time becoming legal here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

167. I work with Hispanic immigrants

so I have knowledge of the regulations. I am sure they are online somewhere. Back in the 1980s when Raygun changed the immigration policies and standards, amnesty was granted to undocumented immigrants but the new policies made it more difficult to immigrate from Central America. There is a very low quota per year.

On the other hand, Europeans can easily immigrate. I have a co-worker from The Czech Republic who came here and became a citizen in 3 years.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. LOL I just posted the same reply

:)

[Triana]

5. Penalize the employers who hire illegals and FIX the damn system...

...so that employers can properly verify if they are illegal. If they are, (and employers should be required to verify that) then employers should be forbidden to hire them - lest they be fined hefty fines for doing so.

It's an illegal employer problem....

[Greyhound]

136. This is exactly the point, which is why they refuse to talk about it.

Too many people make too much money and get too much status from advocating the false choices presented to actually fix the problem. It is going to come down to those of us that see through the different brands of bullshit to force a solution on them.

[Triana]

198. Damn right. Those who stand to benefit most from the 'status-quo'...

...are not about to even *mention* fixing the problem. They're making too much $$$$$$ off of it.

[SheilaT]

6. Annex Mexico.

Make companies there pay the current Federal Minimum Wage, as pitiful as it is. Get into a lively debate about what language or languages should be official languages. Make "Sabado Gigante" required watching.

I'm only slightly sarcastic here. I know it's impractical, but I think annexing Mexico has possibilities.

[Greyhound]

150. I'm don't think the Mexican would want that.

They are proud of their heritage and culture and wouldn't appreciate the changes that would be forced upon them.

But other than that, it sounds like a good idea to me.

[SheilaT]

191. How silly of them.

Imagine, wanting to retain one's culture and heritage! :D

[Jed Dilligan]

8. Nothing with roundups of people, ever

You won't have my support for any effort to inflict law on a population, rather than individuals.

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. Oh goodie

Time to bash immigrants again.

Must not be any murderers or polygamists in the news today. :eyes:

[Subdivisions]

12. Do you have a job, and if so

what is it you do?

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. And what would be the reason for that question?

:)

[Subdivisions]

60. I was just curious as to whether or not

you have a job that Americans actually would want to do. Apparently, mine is not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

163. You are listening to the talking points

Of course they want you to think Americans don't want to do your job, as that makes it possible for them to pay immigrants a less than living wage to do your job.

It's all about the hype. The truth is that American citizens most likely DO want to do your job. They just insist on a decent salary.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Greyhound]

62. Funny how you assume that no one in Boston is complaining about the

illegal Irish, while in fact, they are and for exactly the same reasons. Boston has one of the country's highest costs of living and the job market is tight.

The laws do make it harder for those from south of our border and for good reason, we don't need any more labor sources, we have plenty domestically and if employers were forced to use them they would have to raise pay and provide benefits, and that is the real reason for this BS argument, and the false BS "choices" offered. As long as there is an endless supply of desperate, helpless, people to use up and throw away, we will never again have to pay a fair wage for an honest days work.

[EFerrari]

66. That's simply untrue. Where unions make common cause with

undocumented workers as they have in Los Angeles, wages go up.

All we have left is the xenophobia.

[Greyhound]

91. Is there something about the concept of supply and demand that eludes

your capacity to understand? Yes, the wages go up a little, but they have been artificially suppressed for decades. I'm not going to wade through the morass of statistics for the specifics, but union wages in LA have declined @ least 50% in real terms in the last 30 years, so a 10% or 15% increase is not an improvement, it just sucks a little less.

[EFerrari]

96. Yes, it sucks a little less than the pie in the sky solutions

proferred from arm chairs.

And my understanding is just fine, thanks.

[Greyhound]

120. I've made no pie-in-the-sky suggestions, in fact quite the opposite.

The solution is tried and true, cheap, and easily implemented. All that is lacking is the will and desire to fix it, and the lack comes from both sides.

You just advocate continuing the exploitation and needless suffering, with the inevitable result of abject failure, just so that you can benefit.

[EFerrari]

125. That's would be a negative. No.

I advocate for a living wage for workers and the universal healthcare that Dr. Dean said rightfully we all pay for but don't get.

I have had too much contact with undocumented workers who have no recourse to the law to want this system to continue as it is.

[Greyhound]

131. Which has exactly what to do with illegal economic refugees? n/t

[EFerrari]

135. You mean, illegal hunger?

Illegal hunger that *we* created through our "policy" in Latin America and profit from today?

It's funny because, you think I don't see the bigger picture and I think you don't.

lol

Oh well.

[Greyhound]

161. The problem is that we are both right.

Stopping illegal immigration here is relatively simple by stopping the source of jobs.

Fixing the problems we created that, in turn, created the source of the immigration issue is also possible.

The real problem is that we don't have the will to honestly address either of theses issues because when you get to the bottom of it, they are both just symptoms of the same problem, the global corporatocracy.

[EFerrari]

164. Exactly. And the political class doesn't want to get near

fixing a problem that is lining their pockets.

I miss statesmen, such as they were and if we ever really had them. :(

[EFerrari]

50. You know what's pitiful? That YOU don't understand poverty,

hunger and need so devastating that a person would be forced to leave their home and their family and cross a friggin desert and risk death and put up with racism everywhere just to be able to eat.

That's pitiful.

And seeing this kind of pitiful lack of thoughtfulness, this kind of xenopobhic garbage on this board is nauseating.

/s

[datasuspect]

54. poverty, hunger, and need so desperate

to cross a friggin desert.

true.

and in most cases they die before they get here.

i am confounded by the vicious, callous disregard for humanity that is displayed in these immigration threads.

[Greyhound]

92. All true, but the simple fact is that there are about 5 billion people

on this dirt ball that needlessly suffer like this and it is beyond the capacity of this country to take them in here.

OTOH, according to the 1998 UN Development Program estimates;

$9 Billion Clean water and sanitation planet-wide
$12 Billion reproductive health-care
$13 Billion adequate diet and general health-care
$6 Billion universal education

or, less than 10% of our "defense" budget we can eliminate it. So why is destroying our standard of living preferable to eliminating the world-wide holocaust that is creating the suffering?

[EFerrari]

99. Undocumented workers aren't destroying your standard of living.

Last time I looked, there are no undocumented workers in our three Republican branches of government.

[Greyhound]

128. Insofar as they are one of the tools used by the corporatists,

both re:puke: and Democratic, yes they are. Why do you ignore the rest of the reply?

[EFerrari]

130. By the same logic, we should deport ourselves.

I apologize if I overlooked parts of your post. I may need to just get off this thread.

[Greyhound]

148. I'd say there is an argument for deporting our ancestors if they came here

illegally. Almost certainly the various tribes would be far better off, but I think it's too late for that now.

To attempt to redress grievances from previous generations generally leads to situations like the ME, and end up damaging all those involved.

[EFerrari]

149. That's right. Hell for everyone involved and getting worse quickly. nt

[sandnsea]

14. No serious legislator has proposed amnesty

So your poll is rather worthless.

[Wcross]

17. Amnesty was granted in the past so it is an option.

I have heard it being tossed about as an option. As a matter of fact, "a clear path" to citizenship has been discussed. They may not have used the word "amnesty" but that is effectively what it is.

[sandnsea]

52. A 10 year path is not amnesty

Amnesty is not on the table. It's a right wing talking point to divert people's attention from the real issue, protection for workers from labor gouging businesses.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

153. true - it becomes a slave labor system, or a caste system

for those stuck inside.
But, that is the purpose of the fearmongers who hate aliens, legal or not (other than their obvious, horrifying differences like food, dress, language, or religion) They want to make it as hard as possible, to prevent them from coming here.

Every nation that has a net import of aliens has historically had a stronger economy, stronger education and greater prosperity among its people. Scientific, artistic, and engineering gains are always ALWAYS larger with open borders.
Unfortunatey, historically, every nation that has closed its borders, that stopped immigration, that became closed to outsiders, failed. The greater success in border control, the faster tha fall.

China, Japan, France, England, and many others have suffered from this problem. We are living through a difficult choice - if our leaders close the borders, our society is doomed to wither. If a brave soul starts talking facts, history and truth, we may survive and thrive again. but with today's GOP, I very much doubt it.

[sandnsea]

158. That's the biggest danger

Recreating a guest worker program like the Mariana Islands. Of all the proposals out there, the guest worker is the worst one for labor all around. Yet, it's often the one most supported because the worker will "go home". Right, "go home" if he rocks the boat to be replaced by another "guest worker" who learns to shut up and accept the slave labor system. The only solution I see, that includes the exchange of ideas and talent from immigrants, is path to citizenship so that everybody sees the immigrants as potential citizens and not laborers to be exploited.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

165. this danger is so real, and so present today, that

I am shocked that there has been so little reporting on it.

Once we start with a 2 class system, then other limitations (For the safety of true americans, and the good of the country) will start up. education, the citizenship of children born here, medical care, insurance benefits, (and costs) red-lining for property, education and more,

and worse yet, some bigotted asshole like Frist will promote these types of things as Keep America American or Citizens Unite or America the Beautiful and True patriotic crap, while the reality will be a form of slavery. The mariana's islands are merely a symptom of extreme abuse and serfdom that the haves want to impose on anyone possible. Theirs is a two class world, them and the rest of us.

[CollegeDUer]

15. The Authoritarians of DU out in force I see

They want to punish "illegals' for crossing a border that has never existed.

[Subdivisions]

16. Excuse me?

How can you make a statement like that without backing it up with evidence?

[CollegeDUer]

18. Has there ever been an enforced legal border?

Has there really ever been such a thing? It's always been that if you want to cross -- go for it. You might through uncaught, you might not. For hundreds of years it's been that way.

Now we have the "throw them all out" crowd self-righteously displaying indignation at the brown people coming across the border because they were born into a ghetto where the only way to survive is to sell your body.

[Warren DeMontague]

71. "a border that has never existed"

Yeah. riiiiight.

Welcome to DU.

[EFerrari]

79. You got it. n/t

[OregonDem]

19. About 500 people die each year trying to cross the border

Why is it easier to risk your life to come here than it is to do it legally? If it was easier than risking their lives wouldn't they do it legally?

1. They do pay taxes, such as Social Security (which they do not get to use) and other taxes such as sales taxes. If they were ALLOWED to come here legally then we could collect those other taxes.
2. Illegal immigrants do not bring their families because it is too risky to cross as a group. If they were ALLOWED to migrate here they would bring their families and their money wold stay in our economy. Don't you think that people want to be with their families unless they had no other choice? This sort of thing happens in Cuba also because our laws separate people from their families.
3. If they were ALLOWED to come here legally then our schools and hospitals wouldn't be as burdened because they would be paying taxes to support them.
4. The only people that have been shown to actually lose wages because of illegal immigrants is teenage high school dropouts. Life should be hard for those who choose not to continue their education, otherwise more people would do the same and it also might compel those that did to actually get their GED.
5. People go to where there is money to be made this does not hurt our economy but helps it. Mexicans come here to work cause they would make 10X what they make in Mexico, this pulls them out of absolute poverty and allows the next generation a chance to leave poverty altogether because they can get an education. These second generation immigrants will have greater skills and will contribute more in taxes and to building our economy because they will have an education and will likely speak english. If businesses make more money because of cheap labor, people will go to where there is money to be made and more Americans will become business owners and investors and less of them will seek to do jobs that immigrants will do. It is a false assumption that there is a limited number of jobs.
6. My ancestors came here penniless and I believe that they contributed to this nation and our economy, by paying taxes and fighting to defend it. I am better off because they made the decision to come here and would not deny others to immigrate here. It was immigrants that made this nation great and now instead of welcoming the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, we put up barbed wire and post keep out signs.

The solution is to allow all immigrants that come from friendly countries to come here if their home country verifies that they aren't criminals and if they have not committed property crimes or violent crimes in the US. A simple background check should be all thats needed. There should be no quotas, no skill or language requirements, and no tracking them once they are allowed in. Again a criminal background should be the only thing that keeps people from coming here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. Great post!

:yourock:

[TriMetFan]

78. Will said my fellow Oregonian.

[matcom]

21. YAY!! Tomatoes at $12/pound!

:woohoo:

[OregonDem]

26. Exactly! Then we would have more people going hungry, not less

The only reason we have closed borders is because some on the left know nothing about economics and those on the right are afraid of brown people.

[matcom]

29. bingo

on BOTH statements

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. Yes!!

Glad to see you get it.

Welcome to DU :hi:

[Elwood P Dowd]

46. Wrong!

My father was a farmer for 40 years. If you increase labor costs by 50%, the retail price of most produce would increase about 5%.

[Critters2]

177. And the wages of enough workers would increase

if labor were paid a decent wage, making it possible for more workers to purchase items at slightly increased prices.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

[TahitiNut]

51. Bullshit. Only about 3% of the cost of produce is wages for farm workers!

The vast majority is overhead and profiteering! Sheesh! we could DOUBLE the pay for field workers and, if other costs were held constant, it would hardly be worht the effort to change the price signs in the market! A head of lettuce that costs $1 in the market includes only $0.03 paid to the field laborer!!


Fucking bullshit nonsense! :grr:

[matcom]

59. not bullshit at all

when you take into account the amount of product that will rott in the fields

[TahitiNut]

74. Bullshit confabulation.

That's profiteering Kool-Aid - the apologetics of cheap-labor exploiters.

[OregonDem]

76. Again how is it exploitation if they want the jobs?

They want them enough to cross 20 miles of desert. Exploitation only happens with children and those who do not understand whats in their best interest because they are the ones who can be taken advantage of. This certainly isn't forced labor either since they are going to these employers to get these jobs.

[OregonDem]

75. Isn't that his point? Illegal Immigrants do it now, thats why it only

costs .03 per head of lettuce for them to pick it. If we got rid of them and had Americans do it the price would jump a lot more cause they would demand higher wages. Why would businesses pay Americans 10X the wage to pick lettuce, wouldn't they just go to another country where there is lower wages?

If you were in the grocery store and you saw 2 identical heads of lettuce, where 1 cost 1$ (grown by cheap labor in another country) and they other one 2$ (grown by American workers, not illegal immigrants), which one would you buy? If no one buys the 2$ one then it would mean American workers would be out of a job. How does that help our economy again?

[Elwood P Dowd]

77. That's not how it works

If you increased the wages from $7.00 an hour to $15.00 an hour, the cost of a head of lettuce would only go up a few cents.

[OregonDem]

86. Even if the price went up a little bit, people would still buy the cheaper

product, meaning that Americans would still lose their jobs. Why would businesses remain here if they had to pay higher wages? Wouldn't they just go somewhere else? Besides when prices are cheaper than customers are wealthier since they can purchase more.

[Elwood P Dowd]

93. Using your logic, then we should just import slaves

The businesses would make more money, and the customers would be even more wealthy by saving a few cents on a head of lettuce.

[OregonDem]

100. People should be free to choose where they want to work,

that doesn't happen with slavery. Slavery is exploitation, someone wanting a low wage job is not exploitation.

Slavery prevents people from getting the job they want and working to better themselves. We are all better off, if if we allow ALL people to pursue jobs that will improve their livelihood. And yes earning 5$/hr is an improvement considering they would earn .50$/hr otherwise in Mexico. This pulls them out of absolute poverty.

[Critters2]

178. We are importing slaves

and the pro-illegal immigration types approve wholeheartedly.

[OregonDem]

199. Importing slaves? Don't they come here of their own free will?

They want these jobs and are willing to cross 20 miles of desert to get them. If I was hiring people based on their willingness to work they would be the ones I would hire. Slavery? Where's the chains?

[Critters2]

201. Being forced here by globalization is NOT coming of their own

free will.

[OregonDem]

202. Wouldn't you want a job that increased your pay 10x?

Thats what globalization is offering immigrants from Mexico. If slavery is low wages, then forcing them to stay in Mexico is supporting slavery.

[mccoyn]

189. Not for produce, which is better fresh.

I'll gladly pay an extra $0.03 or even $0.09 for fresh locally grown produce. If a green head of lettuce is sitting next to a white one and the prices are almost the same, lots of people will buy the green one.

[OregonDem]

196. People are buyin more and more foriegn produce including lettuce

Who really knows where there food is coming from anyways cause a lot of times they dont say on the label. So either people prefer foriegn produce because of the price or taste or they are willing to pay cheaper prices for slightly lower quality produce. Shipping and packaging has gotten much faster and better over the years so freshness is less of an issue today.

The U.S., traditionally a net exporter of fruits and vegetables, has become a large net importer, with imports more than doubling between 1994 and 2004 to reach $12.7 billion. U.S. exports of fruits and vegetables have also risen but less rapidly, reaching $9.7 billion in 2004. The surge in imports can be traced to a growing consumer demand for produce from tropical regions, produce that complements U.S. seasonal patterns of production, and produce that competes directly with U.S. production. Because of geographic proximity and low or zero tariffs, Canada and Mexico are among the largest sources and destinations of U.S. trade of fruits and vegetables.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/June05/Findings/USFruitandVegetable.htm

Although the United States is a net exporter of lettuce, total lettuce imports into the United States
have increased from $9.4 million in 1989 to $37.3 million in 2004. The most dramatic increase
occurred between 2001 and 2002, when total lettuce imports increased 70 percent, mainly as a
consequence of a 464 percent increase in leaf and romaine lettuce imports (Foreign Agricultural
Service). In 2004, 32 percent of the lettuce imports were of the romaine and leaf varieties
compared to 50 percent in 2002.
http://aic.ucdavis.edu/profiles/lettuce-2005.pdf

Maybe the US was meant to produce computer chips and airplanes instead of growing fruits and vegetables.

[Greyhound]

173. Why do you constantly repeat reich-wing bullshit?

as has been pointed out to you about two hundred times over the years, this is simply a lie, and your obvious determination to continue to repeat it after it has been shown to you to be a lie, makes you a liar.

So, what's up with this?

[EFerrari]

36. Another thread bashing poor people.

Congratulations, progressive.

[datasuspect]

38. kicked and recommended

for best thread that smells like ass.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. I thought we got passed this crap

this spring.

GRRRR!!

[NaturalHigh]

40. Close the border, remove all illegals...

and fine the hell out of the employers who hired them and took advantage of them in the first place.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NaturalHigh]

44. That one went right over my head.

:wtf:

[datasuspect]

49. close the border

mass deportations, which is what your post implies is straight out of any dictator's playbook.

WTF indeed.

[NaturalHigh]

57. Please forgive me for wanting to see our laws enforced.

[EFerrari]

63. Yes! Let's start with the laws against hungry people!

:applause:

[NaturalHigh]

70. A lot of American citizens are hungry too,

and I don't see illegal immigration doing them a lot of good.

[EFerrari]

73. That's because you're looking in the wrong direction.

Republicans are tanking this country. But, wait -----brown people!

[Critters2]

180. I keep noticing that no one mentions "brown people" but those who

claim to want to help them. Is paternalism a progressive value?

[EFerrari]

185. Is projection a progressive strategy?

[Critters2]

186. Projection? That's amusing. nt

[datasuspect]

188. did you ever consider that some of us are brown people

who resent this "open season" feeding frenzy against people who share the same culture, heritage, and ethnicity as us?

does anyone who posts anti-latino information consider the impact those words have on those of us who might be related to an illegal?

do they consider that a latino in this country has cause for concern (even native-born americans of latino ancestry) when it seems that fellow countrymen have this grudge against a specific type of immigrant?

do they consider that we might be wary because HAVING THE APPEARANCE of being latino might make you suspect?

do any ant-immigrant types ever ASK the specific people they run across their immigration status?

NO.

it is assumption.

if these same lines of reasoning were used against gays or blacks, this board would be in a holy uproar.

[Critters2]

192. Let me re-emphasize

I am not the one who began using the term "brown people". I find it offensive that people pull this phrase out to quash debate, to imply that those arguing for a living wage and enforcement of laws are racist. On this board, it is ALWAYS the so-called immigrant advocates who raise the race/skin color issue. The term "immigrant" is inclusive of Latinos, Europeans, Asians, and others who have recently come here. But the advocates of open borders insist on focusing it on "brown people". I find this offensive.

[datasuspect]

195. what carries more weight with you,

and answer honestly so i know whether to stop responding to you,

natural human rights or united states immigration law?

because that's pretty much the crux of the matter.

current immigration law penalizes the poor, the voiceless, and those who have no advocate.

in instances like that, human rights supercede u.s. immigration law.

every person has the natural human right to eat and provide a decent living for themselves insofar as they are capable.

i want to accord that dignity to all people. if u.s. immigration law stands in the way of that, then it is a bad law and deserves to be violated.

[Critters2]

200. Where we differ, I think, is in the definition of "a decent living"

I don't think undocumented workers are able to provide a decent living at less than minimum wage. I do want everyone to earn a living wage. Corporations don't give a fuck about that. They want to pay as little as they can get away with, and will exploit undocumented workers to do so.

That isn't good for anyone.

[datasuspect]

197. that's fine too

but where are the polls and numerous posts about the massive influx of central and eastern european immigrants?

why are they not a threat?

it is because they are ACCEPTABLE immigrants.

anyone trying to skirt around that is being dishonest.

it is only because the focus of many of the posts deals with the massive influx of latin american/mexican immigrants.

no one i think has ever shown any problem with recent irish immigrants.

and yes, this country has a terrible track record in its dealing with brown people all over the world throughout its history.

anyone remember the forced internment of japanese in WWII?

[EFerrari]

208. Actually, I don't use that term to quash debate but to counter

the obvious and toxic racism that inevitably accompanies these threads. I have no trouble distinguishing between free discussion and racist cant. None at all.

I'm all for a living wage and law enforcement. For everyone. That is the progressive position.

[datasuspect]

64. fuck immigration laws

they loaded and in favor of wealthy people. the current immigration laws favor white europeans who want to emigrate.

make some fair laws, make some laws that are applied without prejudice, then you have a leg to stand on.

[NaturalHigh]

69. Then lobby to change the law.

Until it's changed, your argument is to simply ignore it, which isn't much of a solution.

[EFerrari]

72. Ignoring a nonproblem is generally wise.

Why are so many DUers intent on handing Republicans a wedge.

It's amazing how easily they buy in.

[NaturalHigh]

211. If Democrats continue to ignore or downplay the issue...

it hands Republicans one heck of a wedge. Sorry, that's just reality.

[datasuspect]

82. yes, let me get my billions of dollars

together so i can lobby and buy some representatives and senators.

yeah, that's the ticket.

[High Plains]

94. Yeah, let's enforce ALL our laws.

Got jail space for 20 million pot smokers?

Sometimes the law is an ass. This is one of those times. We need an immigration policy that reflects reality. The reality is that the US economy is dependent on a substantial immigrant labor force. We ought to regularize their status.

[EFerrari]

97. That's right. The present system puts lives at risk and only

the Corporati benefit from that.

[Critters2]

179. S/he is calling you a Nazi.

Hitler began his aggression by taking back the Sudentenland, an area of Czechoslovakia bordering on Southeast Germany and populated more by Germans than by Czechs.

It was an inappropriate thing to post on DU, and you should be offended. I am.

[datasuspect]

182. espousing mass deportation/arrest/confinement WHATEVER

is pretty damn offensive.

[Critters2]

183. But calling a DU'er a Nazi isn't? nt

[datasuspect]

184. i did not specifically call that person that

but they were espousing nazi-esque principles.

sorry you can't see that.

is there anything about mass deportations/arrests that you find comfort with?

[NaturalHigh]

209. Protecting our borders...

and not allowing millions of illegal immigrants to thumb their noses at our laws is hardly a Nazi principle. It's just common sense.

[OregonDem]

56. How is it taking advantage of them if they want those jobs?

If low wages is exploitation (it isn't) then we shouldn't have a closed border because then they are forced to work at one tenth the wage they would make here. Would you rather have them make $.50/hr or $5/hr?

[NaturalHigh]

61. I would rather see Americans paid a living wage...

which would come closer to happening if employers couldn't get away with paying illegals a lower wage.

[OregonDem]

83. People go where there is to be money made

because they act in their own self interests. If businesses make more money from cheaper labor then more Americans will seek to become business owners or investors, and less of them will seek to become field workers. Mexicans come here to make 10X what they make in Mexico. It a win-win not a win-lose situation.

[NaturalHigh]

210. Illegal immigrants seeking employment in the US...

applies downward pressure to American wages. This is not a "win" situation for American workers. To believe otherwise is to buy into corporate talking points.

[Greyhound]

42. Other. None of the options presented will do one thing to fix the problem

and that is the point of these non-solutions, isn't it? Give the sheeple the illusion of action and the illusion of choice while continuing gouge and exploit.

A solution that would work and would cost next to nothing (in federal government terms) is to make and enforce the penalties for hiring illegals so harsh that no company would even consider hiring an illegal immigrant.

No jobs = no motivation to come.

[Warren DeMontague]

68. Funny, I was looking for "go after the companies that hire illegals"

and I didn't see it up there.

[oldcoot]

113. Exactly

After all, corporations that knowingly hire illegal aliens are breaking the law and should be held accountable. I would favor either requiring jail time for the top executives of companies that continually break the law or property forfeiture laws where the government would seize the businesses of repeat offenders to discourage hiring illegal immigrants.

[Cleita]

81. Is it really illegal immigration that's bothering you or

just unauthorized and undocumented workers doing jobs here on this side of the border? Because if it's all of illegal immigration, that's a really big job to seal both borders and everything coming in across two oceans and flying into this country from foreign lands.

If it's immigrants working here without papers, then that might be doable. However, keeping out people who could be brought in legally to work is not going to keep out terrorists. So what is it that Americans really want?

[jerry611]

98. Funny that other nations don't have a problem sealing a border

You build a wall and patrol the holes, I gurantee you that you wlll cut illegal immigration by 80% overnight. Then what you do is make it a crime for employers to hire an illegal immigrant. Also cut off social services like non-emergency healthcare and education.

I assure you, that 20% will not even bother to stay.

[EFerrari]

102. But, those workers PAY for healthcare and education.

Just because your government exploits them, you think their money isn't as good as yours?

It's too late, Jerry. There are so many L E G A L Hispanics here, you shouldn't be worried about sealing the border. You should be worried about segregating your neighborhood and watching your daughters.

We're here!

[jerry611]

107. It has nothing to do with legal immigrants

We are talking about illegal immigrants. People who go through the process of being an American citizen and learning to speak English are not the issue at all. I don't see anyone claiming that legal immigration should be halted.

We are also not talking about skin color. But more than 90% of illegal immigrants happen to be Hispanic and most enter the nation through the Mexican border. That's why we need to focus enforcement on the Mexican border.

Legal immigration is done in a controlled manner that allows both the immigrant and the nation to melt together. Illegal immigration is uncontrolled and has much more downsides than up. It is illegal immigration that is destroying the middle class. I've seen that with my own eyes. I go to the ER and the waiting room will be full of non-english speaking illegals. Whose paying for that bill? My insurance company. And when what eventually happens? My premiums go up.
Now what about education? Class sizes are already over 40 students each. Should we take in all the poor from Latin America and make our classes 60 students a class?

We currently have 40 million Americans without healthcare. And you want to talk about adding another 100 million by 2050?

You are insane!

[EFerrari]

112. Woo hoo! My people seem to be winning one.

:rofl:

[Theodolite]

101. Close the border and remove the illegal europeans

For those who chose "Close the border, remove all illegals.", how should we remove them, in cattle cars? I want anyone who is of European Origin and who wants "remove all illegal" to get out of my country now. Europeans are all "illegals". When Chris Columbus "discovered" america, it was already occupied. America is founded on stolen lands. It sickens me to hear some haole from european blood crowing how we simply must round them up. To those with that view, I spit in your face, get the hell out of my country NOW you illegals. To my brothers and sisters from the south without documentation, please excuse my fellow Americans racism, you are always welcome to share north america with us.

[EFerrari]

105. Welcome to DU, Theodolite. We usually do better than this.

:(

[Theodolite]

114. TY

I would like to retract the spit in your face comment, that was out of line. I feel Very strongly about this issue rounding of them up and deporting them. Either those who wish that either have not thought through what that would do to families and children OR they are hateful cruel people. It sickens me that greater than 50% vote for forced removal. In my opinion that is some kind of Trail-of-Tears business that will devastate millions of people. It is a sick fantasy that hopefully will never happen.

[EFerrari]

117. This is a big board and it reflects every level of thoughtfulness

there is.

I share your concern. There are hundreds of thousands of split up families as it is. Mixed status, years of separation. It's enough to break your heart.

[jerry611]

109. Grow up!

That chidish argument doesn't work...

[Cleita]

111. Seems your argument is the childish one.

How are you going to get all us legal hispanics to go? I guess you are going to have to wall up your neighborhoods so you don't see us.

[jerry611]

115. I never said anything about legal immigrants

I am talking specifically about ILLEGAL immigrants...

And I don't give a damn what color their skin is. They can be European or Canadian for all I care. The issue is that we don't have much of a problem with illegals coming from Europe. Those immigrants have the decency and respect to apply for citizenship or get a alien ID.

You are desperately trying to make this a racial issue because you know that is the only way you can win this debate. It isn't a racial issue at all. It is about economics, national security, and the law.

[EFerrari]

119. It's not about economics, undocumented workers pull more

than their weight. It isn't about national security, there were no Jalapenos on those planes.

The law, then. Let's make this about "law and order" and there's your new Southern Strategy.

The law, my @ss.

[Subdivisions]

124. ...

"there were no Jalapenos on those planes"?

WTF? What a stereotypical racist kind of thing to say!

[EFerrari]

127. It's a term of endearment, Duer, not an insult. n/t

[Subdivisions]

134. I just asked my wife, the former wife of a Mexican man...

and I asked two of his teenage kids, who are now my step-children and are Mexican-American, if the term you used was a "term of endearment" as you say or is a racist stereotype.

All three said it was racist.

[EFerrari]

137. LOL! Your poll suffers from small sampling. n/t

[Subdivisions]

141. Small sample maybe...but so far, it's 4 of us and 1 of you...

which means:

80% View it as a racist remark
20% View it as a "term of endearment"

Prove your case and I will humbly withdraw.

[EFerrari]

144. Yeah, I'm going to insult my own people.

LOL!

That's rich.

[Subdivisions]

146. That's what I was looking for.

[EFerrari]

151. It's all over the thread and all over the LATINO forum.

Maybe you need to hone your searches.

[Subdivisions]

152. So, I can call your people "Jalapenos" without being viewed

as a racist?

[EFerrari]

154. I think your slip is showing, Texas Explorer. Now, explain to me

how it is that you have a physical reaction to seeing Latinos at a work site? And you have 5 Latino step children. Do you have a physical reaction to them too?

[Subdivisions]

156. Yes, I do...I embrace them. But, you didn't answer the question.

[EFerrari]

160. I have no idea why you'd want to use a term of endearment

for people that cause you physical distress.

[Subdivisions]

169. "Hispanic" or "Latino" is sufficient for me, thanks.

You are trying to make this a race issue. It is not. It is about Americans not having jobs and ending up in the same boat as those who so desparately need to come here so that they can have a job.

You call me racist all you want. But I'm not the one going around calling an entire culture "Jalapenos". Term of endearment or not, it sounds racist to me.

[EFerrari]

171. I don't have to "try" to make this about race. n/t

[jerry611]

132. The studies don't show that they carry their weight...

The cost by the average taxpayer to take care of the illegal aliens is $90,000 each. Now since most Americans can't afford $90,000, where are we supposed to get this cash from? Increase the national debt?
And when I say take care of them I mean healthcare, education, and living expenses. The average visit to the Emergency Room is $600. Do you think that the illegal immigrants that go to the ER will pay for that bill? No. They don't have that kind of cash on hand. They don't have insurance or credit cards. And because there is a federal law, the hospital can't turn them away. Fine. But someone still has to pay that bill. And if the government won't pay, the illegal won't pay...who ends up paying? ME! YOU! And every other legal American taxpayer. In my opinion, that is wrong. Very wrong.

And what about the schools? We have a teacher shortage. Schools are beyond capacity before they are even built. Test scores are declining. And you think adding to the population won't make the problem worse?

As far as national security, you really think that we having the 2 longest unprotected borders in the world favors our national security? Give me a break. No one else has a problem controlling their borders but us. Why is that? Do you know how the Soviet Union got their spies inside America? They didn't have to do anything fancy. All they did was go in through Canada.

[EFerrari]

139. This $90K number has been debunked over and over and over here

Do a search.

[Cleita]

142. Since you seem to have a lot facts with no links to back them,

let me give you a link to a study center who attempts to get their facts right.

http://pewhispanic.org/topics/index.php?TopicID=16

There are many studies done by this non-biased research group that seem to differ from your claims.

[proud2BlibKansan]

187. Baloney!

Stop getting your statistics from biased websites. That $90K figure has been debunked repeatedly here.

[NaturalHigh]

212. So how much do illegals cost each of us, then?

How much is too much?

[Cleita]

126. There is a problem with illegals from Europe and Asia. There

always has been. The major cities of the US are full of them. Today illegals are coming in through Canada from Russia and the countries of the Soviet Union for the same reason the Central Americans come in, economic destitution in the countries of their origin and the desire for a better life.

I have put up a practical solution which is for the INS to increase the quotas of legal immigration for workers from Mexico and elsewhere to meet our need for their labor, but every time I do the posts are ignored because apparently this really isn't the solution the anti-immigration sycophants want. You see the immigration laws favor those with education and skills above laborers, but what we need are laborers and the laborers need our jobs, which if they were legal could give them the legal protection so that they wouldn't pull the wage market downward.

Oh by the way, surfing through my favorite white pride hate website, the acceptable word is "racialist" and they are very proud to be racialists. However, the poor dears are getting very confused. In their blind hatred of Jews they have been siding with Muslims, but oops they can't like those raggers (their word not mine) either. It's not properly caucasian of them. Oh the confusion that rains when you are not honest with yourself about your real agenda. I would put up the link however since it's against the rules I can't.

[Subdivisions]

118. Your statement implies that you came here from another

country through legal means.

Welcome to America.

[Cleita]

129. I was born in a foreign country but I entered this country

with an American passport because my father was a born American citizen. I am considered a citizen from birth. However, I know racist sentiment when I see it because I had to endure it directed at my mother. There are many like me throughout the USA.

[Subdivisions]

145. I've seen the very same sentiment towards my

five Mexican-American step-children when we moved from Texas to Jackson, Wyoming. I moved them back to Texas because of it.

[Theodolite]

123. Forced Removal is the childish argument

Forced Removal is the childish argument. Please think through what that will do to millions of people. What about their "anchor babies" who are US citizens. Will you want to amend the constitution to strip them of citizenship. If this sick fanstasy does come to pass, who will be there to loot whatever they left behind, would that person be you.

[jerry611]

143. Closing the border is the first step

The rest can be worked out later...

And if you look at the poll on this thread, the vast majority of DUers favor closing the border. If liberals are in that much support of closing the border, I assure you the independants and the conservatives are probably even more in support of it.

The majority of Americans do not want open borders. And any politician (of either party) that runs in favor of illegal immigration is going to be slaughtered at the polls.

[OregonDem]

103. Aren't workers still competing with cheaper labor if the border is closed?

Why would closing the border change that? I would rather have the businesses here hiring cheap labor supporting our economy, then have businesses leave our country to hire cheaper laborers elsewhere cause we kicked out all the illegal immigrants.

[LaPera]

116. Where's fining the employers who are directly causing this problem? You

sound like Bush it's everyone else fault, except the greedy employers fault nor the greedy corporations & businesses who hire them...That where the blame lies and absolutely and directly.

Until the employers are heavily fined over and over again until it's not profitable and face jail time, (which Bush & the republican will never allow) the problem will NEVER be solved.

[EFerrari]

122. If we had a living wage, then English speaking American

citizens would enjoy an advantage.

And if we stopped messing with democracy in Latin America, if we had sane trade policies, the people would have no incentive to come north in the first place.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

121. Grant amnesty, provide a guest worker program, and ease immigratrion laws.

The rest is nonsense. Poor people are going to go where the jobs and opportunity for bettering their lives are. They will do so "legally", "illegally", or by force if necessary.

Moses didn't head for Canaan because it was worse than Egypt or the "wilderness".

[Cleita]

155. A sensible solution that would work to the benefit of all but

you don't see any overwhelming support for it. And they wonder why we think the real reason behind it is racist.

[helderheid]

133. Punish HARD the companies that hire them.

[OregonDem]

147. Why would you want to punish business owners who offer jobs

to people that pay them 10x the wage they would get in Mexico? With your solution a lot of American business people would lose their businesses, and Mexicans would have to go back to working for .50$/hr in Mexico.
If the border was closed and all the illegals transported back to Mexico than Americans would STILL have to compete with Mexico's farm workers, so it doesn't help the American worker at all. Especially since consumers would buy the cheaper foreign goods, causing Americans to lose their jobs since no one bought their more expensive product.

How does your solution then help fight poverty?

[helderheid]

172. We don't have an illegal immigration problem. We have an illegal employer

problem:

Reclaiming the Issues: "It's an Illegal Employer Problem"
by Thom Hartmann


Every time the media - or a Democrat - uses the phrase "Illegal Immigration" they are promoting one of Karl Rove's most potent Republican Party frames.

The reality is that we don't have an "Illegal Immigration" problem in America. We have an "Illegal Employer" problem.

Yet it's almost never mentioned in the mainstream media, because to point it out could slightly reduce the profits and CEO salaries of many of America's largest multi-state and multinational corporations - who both own the media and contribute heavily to conservative politicians. Republicans would prefer that the "criminals" covered in the press are working people, and that corporate and CEO criminals not get discussed.

As the Busby/Bilray contest showed, "illegal immigration" is a red-hot issue for American voters. The Democrat Busby was way ahead until she committed a faux pas before a group of Latinos, leading to (false) media reports (particularly on right-wing talk radio) that she was encouraging illegal immigrants to vote for her in the upcoming election. Her Republican opponent seized on this and hammered the district with ads for the last few days of the campaign (while voting machines curiously went home at night with some of the poll workers), and now a Republican lobbyist has taken the seat of a Republican congressman convicted of illegal deals with Republican lobbyists.

Encouraging a rapid increase in the workforce by encouraging companies to hire non-citizens is one of the three most potent tools conservatives since Ronald Reagan have used to convert the American middle class into the American working poor. (The other two are destroying the governmental protections that keep labor unions viable, and ending tariffs while promoting trade deals like NAFTA/WTO/GATT that export manufacturing jobs.)

As David Ricardo pointed out with his "Iron Law of Labor" (published in his 1814 treatise "On Labor") when labor markets are tight, wages go up. When labor markets are awash in workers willing to work at the bottom of the pay scale, unskilled and semi-skilled wages overall will decrease to what Ricardo referred to as "subsistence" levels.

Two years later, in 1816, Ricardo pointed out in his "On Profits" that when the cost of labor goes down, the result usually isn't a decrease in product prices, but, instead, an increase in corporate and CEO profits. (This is because the marketplace sets prices, but the cost of labor helps set profits. For example, when Nike began manufacturing shoes in Third World countries with labor costs below US labor costs, it didn't lead to $15 Nikes - their price held, and even increased, because the market would bear it. Instead, that reduction in labor costs led to Nike CEO Phil Knight becoming a multi-billionaire.)

Republicans understand this very, very well, although they never talk about it. Democrats seem not to have read Ricardo, although the average American gets it at a gut level.

Thus, Americans are concerned that a "flood of illegal immigrants" coming primarily across our southern border is, to paraphrase Lou Dobbs, "wiping out the American middle class." And there is considerable truth to it, as part of the three-part campaign mentioned earlier.

But Dobbs and his fellow Republicans say the solution is to "secure our border" with a fence like that used by East Germany, but that stretches a distance about the same as that from Washington, DC to Chicago. It'll be a multi-billion-dollar boon to Halliburton and Bechtel, who will undoubtedly get the construction and maintenance contracts, but it won't stop illegal immigration. (Instead, people will legally come in on tourist and other visas, and not leave when their visas expire.)

The fact is that we had an open border with Mexico for several centuries, and "illegal immigration" was never a serious problem. Before Reagan's presidency, an estimated million or so people a year came into the US from Mexico - and the same number, more or less, left the US for Mexico at the end of the agricultural harvest season. Very few stayed, because there weren't jobs for them.

Non-citizens didn't have access to the non-agricultural US job market, in large part because of the power of US labor unions (before Reagan 25% of the workforce was unionized; today the private workforce is about 7% unionized), and because companies were unwilling to risk having non-tax-deductible labor expenses on their books by hiring undocumented workers without valid Social Security numbers.

But Reagan put an end to that. His 1986 amnesty program, combined with his aggressive war on organized labor (begun in 1981), in effect told both employers and non-citizens that there would be few penalties and many rewards to increasing the US labor pool (and thus driving down wages) with undocumented immigrants. A million people a year continued to come across our southern border, but they stopped returning to Latin America every fall because instead of seasonal work they were able to find permanent jobs.

The magnet drawing them? Illegal Employers.

Yet in the American media, Illegal Employers are almost never mentioned.

Lou Dobbs, the most visible media champion of this issue, always starts his discussion of the issue with a basic syllogism - 1. Our border is porous. 2. People are coming across our porous border and diluting our labor markets, driving down US wages. 3. Therefore we must make the border less porous.

Lou's syllogism, however, ignores the real problem, the magnet drawing people to risk life and limb to illegally enter this country - Illegal Employers. Our borders have always been porous (and even with a "fence" will still allow through "tourists" by the millions), but we've never had a problem like this before.

And it's not just because poverty has increased in Mexico - today, about half of Mexico lives on less than $2 a day, but 50 years ago half of Mexico also lived on the equivalent of $2 today. Our trade and agricultural policies are harmful to Mexican farmers (and must be changed!), but we were nearly as predatory fifty years ago (remember the rubber and fruit companies, particularly in Central America?).

Yet fifty years ago we didn't have an "illegal immigration" problem, because back then we didn't have a conservative "Illegal Employer" problem.

As the Washington Post noted in an article by Hsu and Lydersen on June 19, 2006:

"Between 1999 and 2003, work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Homeland Security Department. The number of employers prosecuted for unlawfully employing immigrants dropped from 182 in 1999 to four in 2003, and fines collected declined from $3.6 million to $212,000, according to federal statistics.

"In 1999, the United States initiated fines against 417 companies. In 2004, it issued fine notices to three."

The hiring crimes of Illegal Employers are being ignored by the law, and rewarded by the economic systems of the nation.

Proof that this simple reality is ignored in our media (much to the delight of Republicans) is everywhere you look. For example, check out a series of national polls on illegal immigration done over the past year at www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm. A typical poll question is like this one from an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted in June, 2006:

"When it comes to the immigration bill, the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with one another about what should be done on the issue of illegal immigration.

"Many in the House of Representatives favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a seven-hundred-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor deporting immigrants who are already in the United States illegally.

"Many in the Senate favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a three-hundred-and-seventy-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor a guest worker program to allow illegal immigrants who have jobs and who have been here for more than two years to remain in the United States.

"Which of these approaches would you prefer?"

The question: "Or would you prefer companies that employ undocumented workers be severely fined or put out of business?" wasn't even asked. The word "employer" appears nowhere in any of the questions in that poll. Nor is it in the CBS News immigration poll. Or in the Associated Press immigration poll. Or in the Fox News immigration poll.

Only the CNN poll asked the question: "Would you favor increasing penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants?" Two-thirds of Americans, of all party affiliations, said, "Yes," but it went virtually unreported in mainstream media coverage.

"Illegal Immigration" is really about "Illegal Employers." As long as Democrats argue it on the basis of "illegal immigration" they'll lose, even when they're right. Instead, they need to be talking about "Illegal Employers."

Politically, it's not a civil rights issue, it's a jobs issue, as working Americans keep telling pollsters over and over again.

"Mass deportations" and "Fences" are hysterics and false choices. Start penalizing "Illegal Employers" and non-citizens without a Social Security number will leave the country on their own. And they won't have to confront death trying to cross the desert back into Mexico - Mexican citizens can simply walk back into Mexico across the border at any legal border crossing (as about a million did every year for over a century).

Tax law requires that an employer must verify the Social Security number of their employees in order to document, and thus deduct, the expense of their labor. This is a simple task, and some companies, like AMC Theatres, are already doing it.

For example, Cameron Barr wrote in The Washington Post on April 30, 2006, that: "At one area multiplex owned by AMC, the Rio 18 in Gaithersburg, 11 employees 'decided to resign' this month after they could not rectify discrepancies that arose during the screening, said Melanie Bell, a spokeswoman for AMC Entertainment Inc., which is based in Kansas City, Mo. She said such screening is a routine procedure that the company conducts across the United States."

Not wanting to be an Illegal Employer, the Post noted that AMC "has long submitted lists of its employees' Social Security numbers to the Social Security Administration for review. If discrepancies arise, she said in an e-mailed response to questions, 'we require the worker to provide their original Social Security card within 3 days or to immediately contact the local SSA office.' She said the process is part of payroll tax verification and occurs after hiring."

Easy, simple, cheap, painless. No fence required. No mass deportations necessary. No need for Homeland Security to get involved. When jobs are not available, most undocumented workers will simply leave the country (as they always did before), or begin the normal process to obtain citizenship that millions (including my own sister-in-law - this hits many of us close to home) go through each year.

Republicans, however, are not going to allow a discussion of "Illegal Employers." Instead, they will continue to hammer the issue of "Illegal Immigrants," and tie that political albatross around the necks of Democrats (who seem all too willing to accept it).

Bob Casey, for example, was beating the pants off Rick Santorum in the Pennsylvania senatorial campaign, until Santorum began running an ad that says:

"Bobby Casey announced his support of a Senate bill that grants amnesty to illegal immigrants, shocking hardworking taxpayers all across Pennsylvania. Now Casey's trying to wiggle out of it by saying the bill doesn't offer amnesty and requires illegal immigrants to pay their back taxes. Either Casey didn't read the bill, or he's trying to deceive you. The Washington Times reports the legislation gives amnesty to 11 million who are here illegally, and paves the way for 66 million more immigrants to enter the country. The bill also forgives two of the last five years of back taxes for illegal immigrants, something the IRS would never do for you. This Casey-supported bill even gives illegal aliens Social Security benefits for the time they were here illegally. Fortunately, Rick Santorum voted against the bill, and Rick's leading the fight to make sure it never becomes law. Now you know the advantage of having in our corner a fighter like Rick Santorum."

Casey is still ahead, but the ad is visibly eroding his support. As George Will pointed out in a June 18, 2006 op-ed titled "Calculating Immigration Politics":

"Many Republicans, looking for any silver lining in an abundance of dark clouds, think the immigration issue might be a silver bullet that will slay their current vulnerability. The issue is, as political people say, a 'two-fer.' Opposition to the Senate bill, and support for the House bill, puts Republican candidates where much of the country and most of their party's base currently is -- approximately: 'Fix the border; then maybe we can talk about other things.' And opposition to the Senate bill distances them from a president who, although rebounding recently, has approval ratings below 40 percent in 29 states."

Now even Bush is talking like the Republicans in the House of Representatives - time to "get tough" and give Halliburton a few hundred billion to build a fence.

But still nobody is talking about the real problem here - the Illegal Employers.

Hopefully one day soon a dialogue like this fictitious one may ensue on, for example, Face The Nation:

Bob Schieffer Senator, do you really think the solution to the illegal immigration problem in America is to offer amnesty instead of building a fence?

Senator Stabenow Bob, I think you've been drinking some of Karl Rove's Kool-Aid. Illegal immigrants aren't the cause of undocumented workers driving down wages in this country. It's caused by Illegal Employers. We need to do something about these corporate criminals.

Bob Schieffer (baffled) Illegal employers? But what about the illegal aliens?

Senator Stabenow Bob, the aliens wouldn't be here if they didn't think they could get a job. Of course, we need to clean up US agricultural subsidies and trade policies that are causing human suffering in our neighboring countries, but to truly protect the pay standards of workers here in the United States we need to crack down on the Illegal Employers. They're the magnets that are drawing people in from all over the world, many of whom come in as tourists and then overstay because they get illegal jobs. And these Illegal Employers are breaking the law - both immigration laws and IRS laws. I suggest that we need to tighten up these laws against Illegal Employers, adding huge fines for first offenses, jail time for CEOs for second offenses, and the corporate death penalty - dissolve their charters to operate - for repeat offenders.

Bob Schieffer (stammering) The, the, er, did you say "corporate death penalty"? You mean against companies?

Senator Stabenow Better companies die than human beings. These Illegal Employers, in their quest for ever-cheaper labor, are drawing people to cross our borders in ways that cause many people to die in the deserts of the southwest. These people were executed, for all practical purposes, by the policies of a few greedy and lawbreaking American companies. When companies are repeat offenders, they should be dissolved, their assets sold to reimburse their shareholders, and let other, more ethical companies pick up the slack. We used to do this all the time in America when companies behaved badly. Up until the 1880s, an average of around 2000 companies a year got the corporate death sentence in the US.

Bob Schieffer (bug-eyed) But what about the illegal immigration problem?

Senator Stabenow (patting Schieffer's hand) It's okay, Bob. You shouldn't listen so much to those Republicans. There isn't really much of an illegal immigration problem - it's an Illegal Employer problem. When we clear up the Illegal Employer problem in this country, we'll be back like we were before Reagan started allowing employers to behave illegally. When non-citizens can't get a job, most of them will go home, as they always have in the past. We don't need a fence, we don't need amnesty, we don't need mass roundups or deportations, and we for sure don't need guest workers. We have as many unemployed citizens in this nation as there are illegal immigrants - in my state of Michigan, for example, Flint and Detroit have massive unemployment since Reagan and his corporate cronies declared war on working people. When we get rid of Illegal Employers, that's one step in helping the job market tighten up so that legal employers will have to pay a living wage to attract legal citizens to work. That and rational labor and trade policies, and we can begin to restore our middle class and put our cities back together.

Bob Schieffer (nodding) It makes sense, Senator. An "Illegal Employer problem." Who would have thought of that?

Senator Stabenow (smiling) Well, Bob, the Republicans thought about it, back in the 1980s. But they thought it was a good idea. Which is why we have this mess today. Get rid of the Illegal Employers - toss a few CEOs into jail and shut down the outlaw companies - and the rest of this part of the problem will be easy and inexpensive to fix...

Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author, and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show carried on the Air America Radio network and Sirius. www.thomhartmann.com His most recent books include "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," "What Would Jefferson Do?" and "Ultimate Sacrifice." His next book, due out this autumn, is "Screwed: The Undeclared War on the Middle Class and What We Can Do About It."

[EFerrari]

174. I usually agree with Thom but can't here.

The answer isn't in fining employers for two reasons. They generate jobs and we don't want to mess with that. Two, we can predict those fines will never be enforced fairly, can't we?

We need a living wage. If we had that, the field would tilt in favor of the most skilled workers.

[OregonDem]

181. Interesting read, Here is some of my beliefs on the subject.

I believe that the US is the most wealthiest nation on earth not because of protectionism but because of free trade and because we have the largest immigration population coming here of any other country in which they help by contributing to our economy (they are a valuable resource not a drain on our economy). I believe we are seeing a large concentration of wealth because corporations have too much influence in government and they are having subsidies, tariffs, tax breaks, and contracts thrown their way. Look at the Medicare and Energy Bill that Republicans passed awhile ago, this only benefited the oil companies and pharmaceutical industries. Government is also allowing them to abuse public lands and goods. This kinda shit decreases competition since only those with political influence can compete leaving smaller companies out in the cold unable to compete. Workers are having a hard time not because of free trade but because they are paying taxes and seeing very little in return since they have very little influence in Congress. American workers are also refusing to organize to compete with management over profits, this is puzzling to me and I don't understand why that is the case. Despite that workers here in the US enjoy really high wages compared to the rest of the world and this is because they have a tremendous amount of capitol invested in them, making them more productive which certainly influences how much they earn.

[LaPera]

138. Where's fining the employers, who are directly causing this problem? It's

sounding like Bush & the republicans here... that it's everyone else fault, except, the people causing the problem DIRECTLY... It is the greedy employers fault, as well as the greedy corporations & businesses who hire them...That where the blame should lie and absolutely and directly they are causing the problems, all for for cheap labor, to break unions and to keep wages low for all of us peasants, to increase their profit margin!!!!

Until the employers are heavily fined over and over again until it's not profitable anymore for them and they face jail time, (which Bush & the republican will never allow) until then the problem will NEVER be solved.

[GreenTea]

157. I agree, this post is sounding like a "lynch 'em up now" mob-While not

addressing the real problem---The EMPLOYERS. You are correct.

[LaPera]

159. This whole thing sounds a bit racist....

Divide & conquer, workers fighting against workers, employers love this... while the real problem lies as usual, where the money is… with the employers.

I also think what "sfexpat2000", who posted above, to my(mistake)post, is right on the money as well...It's the greedy owners (employers) who contol the money that are creating the problems....

"And if we stopped messing with democracy in Latin America, if we had sane trade policies, the people would have no incentive to come north in the first place."

[EFerrari]

168. The Thuggery wants to pit us against each other so they

can get a pass. They want to exploit poor people AND they want to incite hatred.

This issue is a win-win for them. We need to get very clear on this now.

Katrina? Illegal immigrants. Outsourcing? Illegal immigrants. Rotten infrastucture, horrible healthcare, degrading schools? Illegal immigrants.

Don't feed them.

[LaPera]

176. Has EVERYONE read this "sfexpat2000" post before fucking attacking?

[ComerPerro]

162. and what exactly makes someone "deserving", anyway?

[LSK]

194. Am I still at DU?? This poll seems right out of the GOP playbook

:shrug:

[The Jacobin]

207. Isn't border security and employment a democratic issue?

Illegal immigrants are used to bust unions - Democratic issue.
The borders are open to anyone and Bush has done nothing - Democratic issue.

If you punt it to the repugs, then all the swing voters go with them.

[meldroc]

203. As long as poverty exists in Mexico, we'll have this problem.

Having visited Mexico recently, I can tell you that most of the people living there are in deep, terrible poverty. They live in shacks, struggle to get enough food to survive, and work in a job that'll pay maybe $6 or $8 per DAY. You think they're stupid? Of course they're going to come over here to work - even minimum wage is almost an order of magnitude more money than they can make in Mexico.

Quite frankly, I absolutely reject the idea that Americans are better or more deserving of jobs or human rights than non-Americans. As far as I'm concerned, the only priviledge that American citizens should have that non-Americans should not is the right to vote.

If you want to truly solve the immigration problem, you have to address the poverty problem. Build a 50 foot wall, and the Mexicans will use 51 foot ladders to scale it. Even if you spend untold billions and throw the Geneva Conventions aside, and build something that makes the Berlin Wall look welcoming - with razor wire, machine gun nests and land mines, the coyotes will find a way across.

Oh, and illegal immigrants actually contribute to the economy, rather than acting as a drag. While a few of them work "under the table", most of them pay their fair share of taxes, even though they're ineligible to receive many government benefits such as Social Security, and their labors are a huge contribution to our way of life.

For the moment, we should grant amnesty, and reform our immigration laws to make "illegal" immigrants legal. Have them register as they cross the border, and we'll put the coyotes out of business, make it easier to track the criminals and terrorists as they cross, and prevent hundreds from dying trying to cross hundreds of miles of desert on foot.

[NC_Nurse]

205. We should bust the companies

that are employing them. That's why they're here. They will go home on their own if they have no work, no money.

[The Jacobin]

206. Close the border: Meaning

Secure all parts of the border that are not secure crossing points. If there is a border crossing point in Brownsville and another in Laredo, then all the area between the two should be "closed." Force all migrants to cross through a secure crossing point. That means migrants going both ways and migrants crossing both borders.

Once all migrants cross through a checkpoint, then we can at least attempt to determine who is entering and leaving and checking to see what is being passed through.

As to what kind of enforcement, where is the option to enforce employment laws to dry up the demand?

[Strelnikov_]

213. Voted Close Border, Grant Amnesty

When I say amnesty, I am assuming that it will be a process that considers family situation and length of time in the country.

For example, a family unit that has been living in country should be given papers.

A male here on his own, who goes back home on a seasonal basis, someone who has not really taken up residence, should have to apply for papers like everyone else.

My view is that the people who have taken up residence here did it under a system that implied hiring undocumented workers was acceptable. Making families relocate would be difficult. The economy has already absorbed these people.

My main concern is what we do moving forward, so this issue does not have to be revisited again in 20 years.

On edit: And by 'close border' I am assuming a more employer centric program going forward. That is, strict enforcement of laws regarding hiring of undocumented workers.