Illegal Immigration Debate is Xenophobia Disguised
Reading about the illegal immigration laws passed in Price William and Loudoun counties, I am struck by the foaming-mouthed obstinacy of those who stop at the word “illegal”.
The upstanding citizens of both counties that refuse to debate any aspect of the multi-faceted relationship we have with immigration in America if the word “illegal” is present. It really defies all rational thought. Until you replace the word “illegal” with the word “foreigners”.
And in this context, I mean the definition of “foreigners” as people who are different in language, culture, and maybe physical appearance, and almost importantly, who are perceived as having a lower socio-economic status.
To test out my proposition, let’s take a few quotes as an example, and substitute “foreigners” for “illegal” and you’ll see what I mean.
Sue Flemining of Help Save Manasas
“If we turn our heads and permitillegalforeigners entry into our county without making any effort or identification, we are saying our language, our culture, our Constitution, our neighborhoods and our flag are inconsequential.”
Eugene A. Delgaudio (R-Sterling>
“We need help in Loudoun. We are struggling. We are a small county, and we can’t handle the hordes that are coming here and using up our services.IllegalForeign immigration is taking a greater and greater toll on our community.”
Reading these two quotes in their new form, do you see what I mean? The upstanding citizens of Price William and Loudoun counties really don’t care about legal or illegal, that is a red herring. They are really scared about “those people” the different ones who do not conform to the accepted norms of sterile suburban life. Or as Woodbridge resident Chris King said:
“I’m tired of pressing ‘1′ for English” on the phone.
And I am tired of obscene hypocrisy of people like Ms. Fleming and Misters Delgaudio and King. The hypocrisy of their desire to discriminate against the very foreigners who built the houses those very upstanding citizens sleep in, pick the fruit they eat, wash the dishes they eat off, mow the lawns they take pride in, and pretty much do every menial minimum-wage-at-best job none of those very same upstanding citizens would ever demean themselves with.
Especially since we are all immigrants in the end.
The guy who complained about having to press 1 for English … I’m guessing that’s the same Chris King I went to school with that I remember as being the class’s biggest racist all the way back in 7th grade. Of course it could be a different Chris King, maybe a totally non-racist guy who likes to use his phone’s keypad as little as possible.
Sigh. Unsurprising. Blah, blah, supporters of restrictions are racist xenophobes, etc and so forth.
Never mind the contrast between “foreign” and “illegal” has a slight substantive impact, Wayan.
Unfortunately, this is close to racial profiling. Who do they mean to target? How can you tell who is and who isn’t? Would you believe that there are white Europeans who are here illegally too but I’ll bet you that they won’t be scrutinized about their legal status.
“Visibility” is what targets you as a potential illegal. If I look like I’m from Central America, will you stop and question me? If my kids look like Juan Valdez, will you bar them from the school?
If I was an anthropologist, I will probably say that the ancestry of the “illegals” will mostly trace back to the people indigenous to this continent, and those “citizens” up there are the immigrants that illegally took this land we live on. So please, get off your high horse and expose yourself like the elitist that you are.
You go MBFan#2, you made the exact point I was gonna slap on Krempansky. I don’t hear anyone bemoaning the visa overstayers from Northern Europe or even Africa. Not a peep about “hordes” of undocumented Chinese or Canadians.
Nope, just them brown-skinned folks who dare buy the house down the street and have their friends move in, like our grandparents (or even parents) did just a few years back.
In fact, I really feel for the suburbanites who thought if they bought a place far enough out, that somehow all their neighbours would be “white”. So clueless…
Wayan, you say you don’t hear people complain about visa overstayers from other areas beside Latin America. Well here you go.
I don’t care where you came from, who you are, or why you came illegally. If you do not respect our immigration laws, you need to go back to where you came from.
This is a nation of laws. And those that come here illegally, be it from Europe, China, Canada, or yes, Latin America, do not respect those laws.
I definitely believe that we need to make changes to our immigration system. But until we do, we have laws on the books and they need to be enforced.
If that makes me a Xenephobe, then so be it.
I second the comments by Unusual Candor - “illegal” means just that. Yes, we are ALL immigrants by way of our ancestors. My own great grandparents came over from Denmark, but they did it “legally.” They followed the policies in place and became citizens, just like everyone else should. Maybe our laws need change, but until then, everyone should be forced to follow them.
Sometimes we let common sense prevail over the letter of the law. If the free market creates a situation where immigration will benefit our economy; and there’s a way of having an adequate number of immigrants here without creating a massive bureacracy to let them in, then we’d be crazy not to take advantage of that.
In theory, yes, everyone should follow the law. But your talk of “they should all go home/arrest and deport them all” is just impractical/fanciful.
In reality, where we all actually live, our entire economy runs on cheap labour that we refuse to give visas for but love to employ, hence our immigration problem. One that will only get worse if you try to police against the overwhelming supply/demand.
Few of their children in the country learn English… The signs in our streets have inscriptions in both languages … Unless the stream of their importation could be turned they will soon so outnumber us that all the advantages we have will not be able to preserve our language, and even our government will become precarious.
—Ben Franklin, regarding German immigrants in the 1750s.
People who support illegal immigration are really kidding themselves. The cost completely outweigh the gains. For example, closed emergency rooms, over crowded classrooms coupled w/the added expence of ESL programs (English second language). Who pays for it all, you do your children do. All I hear is illegals just want to work, tell that to all the victims of crimes of illegal aliens 1 out of 3 inmates is an illegal over 300,000 (workers) incarcerated, est 90% of murder warrants in L.A. are for illegals (don’t believe me look it up). Studies show for every $1.00 dollar that is payed in taxes by illegals (and other low wage earners) they use $3.00-4.00 in gov’t programs, state/federal.
For all of you who support illegals, you open your wallet first. Put your money where your ideas are. Give an illegal your Social Security number so they dont use mine.
Wayan, you really should learn what words mean before you attempt to use them.
Wayan, a couple things. First, there’s no “n” in my name. Second, if you want to “slap a point” on me - have at it. But doing your best to insinuate that AS A GROUP people that oppose illegal immigration are simply closet racists that don’t like brown people doesn’t just make you an ignoramus, it makes you an asshole hurting your own cause.
I happen to support INCREASES (and dramatic ones) in legal immigration as well as serious reforms to make it easier to complete the process. I also happen to care not one tiny bit where someone comes from - if they’re evading the law to get into the country, then they expose a serious and deadly security risk in the manner in which we approach our own safety. On top of that - forcing a situation where we see people living in the cracks of society doesn’t help anyone.
There are solid arguments opposite my position. There really are. I don’t agree with all, or even many of them - but I can’t just dismiss them out of hand and scream about how people that disagree with me just want to see Arabs sneak nukes over the border.
But no - go ahead and call me a racist. Considering this thread, it just makes me the reasonable one.
Studies show for every $1.00 dollar that is payed in taxes by illegals (and other low wage earners) they use $3.00-4.00 in gov’t programs, state/federal.
That parenthetical aside isn’t irrelevant. If the consumption rate is because they are low income workers then illegal or not isn’t going to change anything. There’s a sizable amount of money paid into the IRS every year that never goes back out in tax rebates because illegals can’t file for their refund.
Regardless of where you stand on the matter we’re talking about a completely moronic system for enforcement. Immigrants are here for the jobs, so if we actually enforced the law with regards to employing citizens or legal guests we would solve the problem at its cause.
It’s also the only place we can actually accomplish anything. Asking local police to enforce federal immigration is a difficult and expensive proposition and prone to failure. Staying under the radar when someone doesn’t know where you’re going to be is hard. The one place we know people are going to be is where they earn money.
I’d also prefer that if someone is going to spend five minutes determining whether I am here legally or not that they do it before I start work my first day on the job, rather than as I lay bleeding on a gurney in the emergency room. I can more easily spare the time in the first case than the second.
Wayan, you lost me when you said “In theory, yes, everyone should follow the law.”
We’re honorbound TO follow the law. It’s what makes society function at all. That includes people who want to come here. I don’t believe that coming here illegally is the way, desperate as folks are to come here.
What we should be doing is what Krempasky’s suggesting: raise the number of visas and streamline the process. But we shouldn’t just turn a blind eye to illegal immigration. We should also be going after the businesses who hire without an I-9.
“Immigrants are here for the jobs, so if we actually enforced the law with regards to employing citizens or legal guests we would solve the problem at its cause.”
The reason we don’t create the giant bureacracy that would be needed to enforce those employment laws is that there’s no problem to be solved.
The influx of “hordes of illegals” over the last 30 years has correlated with the greatest sustained economic expansion in American history. The idea that someone else stated, that “the cost completely outweighs the gains” completely ignores history and reality.
Wayan…once again proving he is the dumbest guy in the room. I think I saw him protesting outside a vegetarian restaurant b/c it didn’t serve meat. Keep using this site as your personal soapbox, that’s what we wanna read, really.
I don’t know that I’d correlate our economic success with illegal immigrant workers, however I certainly do think that the people calling for a crackdown are overlooking the economic realities. I wonder how strongly they’d be calling for reforms if they knew what services would get significantly more expensive if they were put in place.
Illegal employment is most certainly good for businesses, however. It’s funny how many in the conservative movement who otherwise embrace supply-side economics are calling for immigration enforcement.
Somehow I don’t think Wayan has the ability to understand that he’s engaging in a LogicalFallacy: just because some people may oppose illegal immigration due to some bad reason does not imply that all opposition to it is because of bad reasons.
And, if you actually know anything about this issue you’ll realize the huge differences between the illegal and legal varieties, namely that the former directly indicates massive PoliticalCorruption.
Don: illegal alien labor is a tiny fraction of our economy, and if growers couldn’t hire illegal aliens prices would go up a very small amount. For instance, only 10% of the cost of lettuce is due to labor; if the labor cost doubled the price would go up 10 cents, and some say just a few cents.
And, without so much low-skill labor available, employers would be forced to innovate and automate, and that would lead to even more and better jobs. There’s a good chance that after a while not having access to so much low-skilled labor would be a boon.
Perhaps you should bring that up at your next CofC meeting.
People who are calling for a crack down always fail to realize that illegal immigrants are a whole swatch of our economy, 12 million people who perform all manner of tasks we refuse to pay more than substance wages for from Wal-Mart to construction firms, to landscapers, to restaurants.
These jobs cannot be automated, and those that already are drop our standard of living enough as it is.
And I do agree with Krempasky’s solution, a massive increase in work visa to the USA, but only if we recognize who we really want working here. Yes, educated workers are great, but we really want cheap workers.
And why not start with those already working here? A paystub with a tax withholding and a police check should be all that’s needed to give out work visas. Visas, I might add, that do not confer a privileged place in the citizenship line.
I object to saying that “we refuse to pay more than substance [sic] wages for…” because the market sets the pay rates for labor. If you want to earn more, show more skill. There are a lot of labor jobs that are highly skilled labor and they’re rewarded with higher wages.
Besides, Wal-Mart isn’t the culprit here, Wayan, they require an I-9 form in order to work for them, like many large employers. The culprits here are smaller firms, not the big national chains.
Tom,
Wal-Mar is one of the culprits. In 2005 it agreed to pay $11 million to settle a federal investigation that found hundreds of illegal immigrants were hired to clean its stores.
Wal-Mart used sub-contractors and claimed that it was unaware that the sub-contactors were employing illegal immigrants as janitors.
TLB, I don’t know what CofC is so I don’t think I have a next meeting to bring something up at. What is it?
I’ll also point out that you claim Wayan is calling everyone opposed to illegal immigration a racist but his post actually says “The upstanding citizens of both counties that refuse to debate any aspect of the multi-faceted relationship we have with immigration in America if the word “illegal” is present.” I think that’s notably different from what you’re claiming he’s saying.
I’m also not sure where you think there’s automation and improvement to be done in most of these low-pay jobs. These are positions in construction, food prep, child care, and other hard labor or warm body type of positions. Maybe field work would see some increased automation if labor costs went up three-fold but in a lot of things there’s a limit to savings and increases in costs in other areas.
The USDA’s Resource and Rural Economics Division estimates that about 1M of the aprox 10M low-wage food prep workforce is illegal. Forcing those folks out would eliminate 1 in 10 workers in that field. Think about how stressed out the business world gets when unemployment numbers drop 1 percentage point. How do you think they’ll feel about a 10% reduction in employees? How do you think it’s going to impact costs?
As far as your 10% figure, I’m going to go with the more generous assumption that you heard this number somewhere and are just repeating it rather than being deliberately deceptive. The closest source for a number close to that comes from the Farm Production Expenses in the USDA’s 2002 farm census, in which they state that the hired farm labor is 10.7% (page 11[pdf warning]) and contract labor was another 2%, adding up to 12.7%. I’ll give you the small change.
What I won’t cede you is the fact that this survey covers ALL agricultural areas so that’s a statistic from data that lumps in dairy and meat production farms, areas that have notably different labor types and groups. After all, I don’t think the lettuce farmer you claim you’re talking about spent 15.8% of their money on livestock and poultry (p10, same link).
This is proven on page 166 & p167 where the employment number breakouts are. 554,434 crop-growing farms spent 18,568,446 (in $1000) on direct hire labor. In the produce world it’s 273,368 and 6,307,986, a factor of 3 smaller.
Other sources put the number at more like 30% and above. “About 40% to 70% of costs in production agriculture are related to labor costs.” says Gregorio Billikopf Encina of U of Cali.
A 50 to 100% increase in costs in an area that comprised over 1/3 of your expenses is more than a few cents.
“CofC” = “ChamberOfCommerce”.
Here’s a long article about produce prices without illegal labor: cis.org/articles/1996/back296.htm
Wayan is clearly trying to portray opposition to illegal immigration as fundamentally nativistic, and thus he’s engaging in a LogicalFallacy.
How do you think they’ll feel about a 10% reduction in employees?
Fill in the blanks: I don’t give a flying f___, they can go f___ off as far as I’m concerned. Avoiding widespread IllegalActivity and massive PoliticalCorruption is much more important than what corrupt employers claim.
Very eloquently put, TLB. You proved my whole post point in one fill-in-the-blanks sentence. You see the word “illegal” and you go batshit, foaming at the mouth, and unable to practice correct punctuation or word spacing.
This bitter conflict over “illegals” is precisely why America needs FoBIA, a definitive and airtight solution to the immigration problem.
So you’re not interested in the financial impact to businesses, and therefor consumers and the economy, only the fact that there’s Illegal Activity?
Laws should exist to reflect reality and improve life for us. It’s the very foundation of the social contract. If you’re just interested in what is and is not legal than what do you care what we change the law to be, amnesty or guest worker programs? Whatever the law is changed to be is what it’ll be.
As far as your paper - which I am guessing you didn’t actually read, since it clearly calls out labor costs as 37% to 44% in paragraph 5, not the 10% you were throwing around - one of the chief components of their argument relies upon the assumption that a lot of growing will move out of the US and we’ll replace products with imports. They also base their assumptions on certain employment realities and workforce availability in Mexico, a reality that’s notably different now that we’re more than the 2 years into NAFTA we were then they wrote that study.
Even if it’s all accurate it completely ignores the impact to our economy. Don’t we have enough off-shoring already? One of the great advantages the US has is a large amount of arable land. Our agricultural exports are 9.2% where our imports are just 4.5%.
We fuck around with this at our own peril.
Singapore has a really interesting take on all this that might prove useful for the US. They have a large portion of their economy made up of labor that’s external to their populace, and they do it by tying an immigration permit to someone who can promise they’ll be employed, housed, and then they’re also responsible if they fuck up….
it’s not a bad idea.
To everyone who thinks those who oppose Illegal Immigration are racist. How about the Mexican Gov’t. In Mexico being an illegal immigrant is a FELONY. I think the Mexicans are sick of paying for people who add very little and take so much from their society. Before you call me a racist, know this Im in favor of keeping illegal immigration a misdomeanor in this country as long as we deport them on the spot, it’s the true racist who don’t want to share everything they have with others. The more I think about it the madder I get, to hell with those racist who would make illegal immigrants felons, those racist like the MEXICAN GOVERNMENT.
I bet in mexico the illegals don’t protest or hold rallies. I wonder why, maybe because mexico enforces it’s immigration laws.
Illegal immigration in Mexico is a felony because the USA pushed them to make it such to try and stem the flow of Central & South Americans transiting the country to get here. Its not enforced in any meaningful way because migration to the USA is a good business for many Mexicans.
And I know (from personal experience) that Mexico doesn’t care if you’re there illegally from the USA.
So according to WAYAN (by the way nice web page) the U.S. has enough influence to shape mexico’s immigration policies. Strange since the U.S. has so much influence why can’t we keep the mexican army from escorting drug dealers across the border? Im sure we could come up with some usless law that mexico would be more than happy to put on the books, just for looks.
The truth is the U.S. has little to no influence on mexican policies. Money sent back to mexico is the mexican governments 2nd greatest source of National income. With that being a fact:
1) Why would mexico bother to listen to what the U.S. has to say about anything, since they know we will not enforce our laws on immigration
2) Logically speaking and you seem very educated WAYAN so here is some simple refresher in econ 101. It doesn’t help Mexico to let ‘illegals’ come through their country to get into the U.S. because they dont send the money back to mexico, they send it back to their country of origin.
Like I wrote in my first comment, since your so in favor of illegal immigration post your social security number so any illegal immigrant I mean foreign immigrant can use it. Or are against any illegal activity that effects you directly. Most liberals and hipocrates are.
Yeah, L Brown, the Mexican gov’t only did that at our behest.
Wait, did you just say that the USA has “little to no influence” on Mexican policies in the same sentance that you note money from the USA is Mexico’s 2nd largest source of national income.
Might those two thoughts be slightly contradictory?
Or let me give you a great big reality check. If I were writing the check that was the 2nd largest source of income for you and your family, might I have influence over what you did? I think so.
And unlike you, I recognize that immigrants - legal or not - are an integral part of my day, from driving my cab to cleaning my office, and I respect their hard work and dedication.
See, Wayan - you again demonstrate a remarkable lack of anything resembling a persuasion gene. Every time someone disagrees with you, you cast all sorts of aspersions on their character, their views on unrelated (or at best, tangential) issues. But I’ll take solace in the fact that every time you put pen to paper (or the digital equivalent), you probably push more people away than convince them.
WAYAN
Is that the best you got, way to answer the question (or weakly sidestep question 1 and avoid question 2 altogether). Logically your arguement makes no sense so I will explain it this way; mexico knows and has known (officially since 1986) that they can do whatever they want in how they approach illegal immigration. It is a can’t lose situation for mexico. They basically are deporting their poor, undereducated, low skilled population North of the border. This benefits the mexican gov’t in several ways:
1) it shrinks the number of the most undesirable population of their society (any society), the poor. This saves money in a variety of ways incarceration, social services, medical services, education, job training, housing, infrastructure mgmt, natural resource allocations.
2) It creates an income where there would have been little to none, otherwise. Next to mexico’s declining oil fields.
So is it a contradictory statement, no. It would be if the America enforced its immigration laws but since we don’t, my statement is true on face value.
Two other points I see you still have not posted your social security number to help out any poor illegal who needs one to get a job.
From your your statement of ‘I recognize that immigrants - legal or not - are an integral part of my day, from driving my cab to cleaning my office’ having illegals around is good for you as long as they are serving you.
Can’t get enough brown servants/slaves since they do those things at less than fair market value.
My dear L Brown, let me help your paranoia along a bit. Not only have I employed immigrants without asking about immigration status, I worked with and for immigrants for years in the construction and restaurant industries, again without regard to their immigration status. In fact, I work for an immigrant right now, with pride.
I have the greatest respect for 99% of them, more than a random percentage of Americans. Because unlike presumably you, they went through much hardship to work in America, not chance of birth, and they treasure every day they can earn money for themselves and their family.
If only more native-born citizens has such get-up-and-go…
“If only more native-born citizens has such get-up-and-go…”
I though “we are all immigrants”; who are these “native-born citizens” that you speak of?
Wayan
first let me thank you for posting my comments and eventhough we don’t agree on this issue we both seemingly have a strong desire to make our views known.
About myself… I am a 36 year old African American born to a teen age mother and a drug addict and physicaly abusive father, my mother has the scars to prove it (she divorced him when I was 2). I ended up going to 6 elementary schools in six chaotic years. She went on to marry an equally abusive alcoholic, when I was 7. Guess what more abuse more drugs and violence. The only difference is that I can actually remember the violence bestowed upon her and I from him. My mother divorced him when I was about 15. I decided while I was in High school I wasn’t going to make any excuses for my life and I wasn’t going to be like any of my ‘father(s)’. I put myself through college and am raising a family of my own. All that I have written is true.
Still think you know me? Doesn’t sound like I had to much fun at the beach while growing up. I respect the law, but don’t respect those who don’t respect the law for whatever reason, most of us had it tough growing up.
With that being said you have completely disregarded my questions and your answers are feable to say the least. Still no Social Security number. I thought you wanted to help?
This immigration issue is a debate that encompasses many levels of argument but the main point is that no one is for “illegal” immigration. However, the reality is that there ARE illegal immigrants in the US and they come in all colors and sizes. I just want to make sure that if a community decides to target illegals, it’s not only the ones from south of the Rio Grande.
Here is a similar example to what is happening now from American’s not so distant past which resulted in the Chinese Exclusion Act, passed by Congress in 1882 -
” Such a thrifty, industrious, alien race, ready to work, are objectionable to other foreign populations, of course, as all the others are permitted to become citizens and vote, and thereby are courted and well treated by all demagogues and knaves. Could the Chinaman vote, the ruffian hoodlums and lawless villians, who are now scarecely restrained from assaulting them in the streets in day time, and who think it brave to assail their quiet homes at night with cobblestones and brickbats, would be dealt with in the most summary manner. The Chinaman’s only sin is, he will work. If he can not get a high price, he will take a low one, but work he will. And then, he is neat, clean, sober and patient, always submissive, peaceable and quiet. . . .
CHEAP LABOR.
That is what California wants, and that is what is developing the agricultural of the State. Take the 70,000 Chinamen out of California, its industries would be ruined, and the lands, now so productive, would be cultivated without remunerative results. They supply, by their toil, nearly all the vegetables and much of the poultry. They are doing a large share of the farm-work, and build all the railroads and irrigating canals and ditches. They do much of the cooking, and nearly all the washing and ironing. It is said they send the money they save back to China. Why? Because they are not safe, either in person or property, here. Were they protected as citizens are, they would soon own lands, town lots and houses. As it is now, the low, the vile, the idle, brutal hoodlum, in San Francisco, and all other large towns in this State, may attack the Chinaman’s house, smash his windows, and break up his furniture and beat him, and he is–only a Chinaman.”
Excerpt from Letters from California (1877) by David Phillips (Ref: http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/timeline/riseind/chinimms/phillips.html)
WAYAN
Where are my last comments, where I explained my upbringing and responded to your statements, I dont see them.
Apologies, L Brown, they were held up for moderation by our comments system. I’ve had them published now, they should be on this page shortly.
Wow, L Brown, that’s a tear-jerker story, but what does that have to do with xenophobia manifested as attacks on immigrants through the focus on “illegal” ?
Nothing from what I can tell.
And the computer tells me you are responding from Alaska. Of all the states, that has to be the one with the least worries about illegal immigration. Unless you’re talking Canadians. No worries on them though. Take away their “eh” and they’ll leave quick enough.
I forgot to note in my comment that if you take out the references to Chinamen and China and replace with Latinos and Central America, you can see clearly that human nature doesn’t change much after 130+ years. And American immigration policy hasn’t changed much either to deal with this type of situation which seems to recur in cycles.
And no, Wayan. It’s not the “eh” you take away. It’s the FL sun and beer. Canucks love them both.
I shared with you that piece about myself because you seem to think Americans have it easy just because we are Americans.
‘I have the greatest respect for 99% of them, more than a random percentage of Americans. “Because unlike presumably you, they went through much hardship to work in America, not chance of birth”, and they treasure every day they can earn money for themselves and their family’.
I can tell by your sarcasm “Wow, L Brown, that’s a tear-jerker story” that only those who are here illegally are worthy of compasion. Apparantly, you have only scorn for your fellow country men who have suffed or are suffering, God only knows what you think of those who serve this country in the Police or Military force.
I still don’t understand why you don’t have a intelligible answer to my question of:
1) Why would mexico bother to listen to what the U.S. has to say about anything, since they know we will not enforce our laws on immigration.
Or my rebuttle to your weak response. Wait, you didn’t answer the question. But I responded back just the same illustrating why mexico doesn’t change its immigration policy.
1a) it shrinks the number of the most undesirable population of their society (any society), the poor. This saves money in a variety of ways incarceration, social services, medical services, education, job training, housing, infrastructure mgmt, natural resource allocations.
Then you came up with this no-brainer.
‘Illegal immigration in Mexico is a felony because the USA pushed them to make it such to try and stem the flow of Central & South Americans transiting the country to get here. Its not enforced in any meaningful way because migration to the USA is a good business for many Mexicans’.
And I know (from personal experience) that Mexico doesn’t care if you’re there illegally from the USA.
Here is my reply.
2) Logically speaking and you seem very educated WAYAN so here is some simple refresher in econ 101. It doesn’t help Mexico to let ‘illegals’ come through their country to get into the U.S. because they dont send the money back to mexico, they send it back to their country of origin. So yes I think mexico cares.
Moving on, yes I am from Alaska we deport via ICE approximately 5 illegals per week.
WAYAN I see you still have yet to post your Social Security Number, if you do I will be more than happy to give this web page to one of those being deported. I forgot you don’t mind if they break the law/commit crimes if it doesn’t effect you directly. What a hypocrite you are WAYAN.
Wayan doesn’t need to post his SSN to help out immigrants, Mr/Ms Brown, that’s just silly. It’s a strawman that you want to use to prove your point, which is equally silly.
Mexico DOES benefit heavily from illegal immigration. Many of the coyotes who guide groups of potential immigrants to the US are based out of Mexico, and their boost to the local economy is clear. The same applies to all those illegal Mexicans (and other nationalities) here in the US, as they send much of their earnings back to their native countries, Mexico included.
5 per week in Alaska? Are you telling me you can’t put 250 more people to work each year up there? C’mon, that’s insane.
Well L Brown, it looks like you have a lot of work to do, starting in your own backyard. It seems the State of Alaska doesn’t share your views. It has a state-wide policies that forbid state agencies from using resources to enforce federal immigration law.
Or you might want to move to where immigration is strictly controlled. May I suggest here.
First I love how someone else has to defend a point that is not intended for them. The point is hypocracy. It is no strawman and you know it. WAYAN is in favor of law breakers as long as their law breaking doesn’t directly effect him. In no way is that a strawman, it’s hypocracy. Keep trying.
I have already noted how much and in how many ways mexico benifits from illegals, so I think you missed my point. Which was countering WAYANS statement about mexico not enforcing their felony immigration laws the U.S. had them put on the books.
I have dealt with ICE on many occasions and the number of 5 per week is what they have told me as recently as last year, so that’s where I got that number from. It may have a more dramatic effect if it were a larger number, but I dont make things up. If you want some real statistics on immigration try “Numbers USA”, google that. Thats the one thing about talking to liberals they never list any real source, they (liberals) believe if it feels right it must be the right thing to do even if it makes no sense.
WAYAN I said I live in AK, not that I agree with state policies, please show me where I said (wrote) that. If your ever going to get better at debating, you first have to listen (read and comprehend) maybe Tom could help you with that. AK (Alaska) is ran by corrupt polititians on every level, mostly republicans. And for Tom’s question of can’t we use another 250 workers (illegal workers) up here the answer is no.
I’ll walk you through this one. Let us say 1 in 5 of those 250 illegals has 1 child in public school in AK, that is $50,000 per year, provided by property tax payers money used to educate the children of illegals. Lets put salaries at $10.00 per hour 40 hours a week, that an average salary of $20,800 per year, put taxes on that amount at approx 16% of the yearly total, it equals out to approx $3328. Studies show (which I stated before, look it up) illegals use approx $3.00-$4.00 (tax payer dollars) for every $1.00 they put into the system. If the average tax paid was $3328 (put into the system) multiply that by 3.5 and they take out $11,648 per year per person/family. A great deal for them not so great for tax payers, just so I can have someone to cut fish, sweep floors, or wait on tables for $10.00 per hour. Also studies estimate 60% and up, of all illegals are from mexico and 51% of all mexican illigals are on welfare of some sort. Given those numbers it would cost the Alaskan Taxpayers (legal ones)an additional $891,072 per year just for mexicos 150 out 250 illegals. The cost for the the total 250 illegals is $1,485,120 per year (calculated at the 51% user rate of Welfare) Now the latest census estimates the illegal population around 5,500.
Now please tell me how that is a good deal for the tax payers of Alaska. I would love to see how you crunch the numbers please show me. Feel free to look up everything I have said, if you want I will reply with the web addresses.
So maybe you and Tom can split the cost of a pizza in figuring out how illegal immigration is good for the USA or Alaska I will accept either. Post real numbers only and none of that jobs Americans won’t do crap. I look forward in reading your reply;)
The cost of education in Alaska, per capita, is $12,104/student/year, in 2004 (most recent data I can find), not the $50k figure you mention, I doubt it’s risen four-fold in three years. In addition, I don’t believe that the influx of one more student would cause the State to spend $12k more, it’s more of an aggregate cost depending on the number of students. That’s not how spending like that works.
So, let’s look at this another way. A person who’s making minimum wage in Alaska, plus a few bucks an hour, is making $9/hr. That’s $18,720. Now the tax rate in Alaska is…
Wait. Wait a second. There’s no state income tax in Alaska.
Nor is there state sales tax.
The State of Alaska is supporting illegal immigrants, under your theory, but the state is, as a whole cash-flow positive. So, the income levels of those people making money in Alaska don’t matter when it comes to expenditures, because the State itself isn’t collecting cash from them in any way shape or form. The Federales get the money.
I also challenge you to get Welfare if you’re not a citizen…
I see you Tom have the same problem with comprehension that plagues WAYAN. If you re-read what I wrote I said if 1 out of 5 illegals out of the 250 deported had a child in the public education system. So for easy math we will keep the yearly cost at 10,000. So 1/5 of 250 is 50(illegal students) at a total cost of 50 x 10,000 equals not 50,000 dollars like I first said but 500,000 to educate the children of illegals (my mistake on the earlier math). All to be paid by the property owners.
Correct there is no blanket State tax in Alaska, (however depending on where you live there are other taxes used by the local Municipalities to fund their budgets, different topic different day). The 16% percent I quoted was an estamate of federal tax.
Tom, if your really under the opinion that since Alaska has a positive cash flow and shouldn’t mind the money it loses to illegals, then after you balance your check book send me everything all the money you have left over. Sound ridiculous well so does this:
“The State of Alaska is supporting illegal immigrants, under your theory, but the state is, as a whole cash-flow positive. So, the income levels of those people making money in Alaska don’t matter when it comes to expenditures, because the State itself isn’t collecting cash from them in any way shape or form. The Federales get the money.”
About getting welfare while being an illegal. One of the first things you need is a fake Social Security number, (I know there is an illegal waiting for WAYAN to put his money where his mouth is and give out his). Then you need other fake documents birth certificate, ect, you get the pic.
So lets say an illegal gets into a vehicle accident while drunk driving (that never happens)anyway. He will receive free medical care no matter the expense, he will never pay for any medical or expenses he causes to anyone else, he will never pay for damaged property, he will never pay court cost, he will never pay incarceration cost.
I asked WAYAN or yourself to come up with a financial model of how illegals were good for this country or Alaska, I don’t see one, where is it. There will never be one. Illegals benefit business owners by working for less than fair market value. While tax payers (federal and state) and ESPECIALLY PROPERTY OWNERS pay for them. It does me, my family my friends their familes and their friends (you get the picture, everyone in my community/state)no good to pay for illegals in our school systems, jails and emergency rooms.
To even think Alaskans should pay for illegals because the State is not in debt is crazy. Like I said balance your check book and send me whats left over. Oh yeah, with a population of approx 675,000 and oil prices at $74.00 a barrel I think we will be ok. In fact Alaska has so much money the state splits the interest from the oil money with the people (I mean legal residents)so I should receive a check from the Gov’t for over 1,500. So please show me a fiscal model of how Illegals benifit anyone. I have to go theres a brown bear in my parking lot. Seriously
Illegals benefit business owners by working for less than fair market value. While tax payers (federal and state) and ESPECIALLY PROPERTY OWNERS pay for them.
This is not only a naive simplification about the impact of low wage workers but also wrong about market value. Lower wage workers benefit everyone in the commerce chain. If you don’t understand that basic concept then you have to conclude that Wal-Mart is able to price their product so low through dark magic, not keeping their own costs lower than competitors.
On the market wage issue you can look at some of the studies and links I have offered up earlier in this discussion which reveal that the migrant farm workers are often earning closer to $10 an hour than the minimum wage. There’s some price-lowering pressure in the illegal labor market but forces still apply and scarcity still has an impact.
Additionally, one thing that never seems to come up from the anti-amnesty side is the fact that people using someone else’s SSN - which seems to get you really worked up - actually puts more money into the system since illegals rarely file for tax returns which they’d be due as lower income payers.
The real savings at wal-mart come frome the fact they no longer buy American products, most of it is from over seas. Next time you walk through Wal mart make sure you look to see where the product you put in your shopping cart came from. When good ol’ Sam was still alive wal-mart was ran a little differently.
Since illegals, at least those with stolen/fake SSN pay into SS but dont get a return back the difference is made up by them soaking up other tax dollars (not always federal)in class rooms, hopital emergency rooms, ect or do they just pay cash after services rendered? WHO PAYS FOR THAT?
PLEASE explain how illegals working for less than fair market value benifits me. How does it benefit the average American who has a land scaping business and pays his LEGAL employees $12.00 per hour, when the competition using illegals pays their illegal employees $8.00 per hour. The LEGAL business man goes out of business and his employees are jobless. I forgot that never happens. Prior to the mass illegal invasion since 1986 those jobs never got done because there was’nt an illegal to do them. Remember before the mass influx of illegals these type jobs were done by LEGAL Americans.
The only thing about quoting studies is that illegals don’t get things like health benifits so if an illegal helps a business make a larger profit through receiving lower wages. Its the tax payers who make up the difference in health benifits, education (since they don’t pay local income taxes in communities that have income taxes).
Besides it being illegal using someone else’s SS# it endangers any benifit the legal person (SS card owner) actually may receive. Ill explain it this way. John Smith in Kansas receives $750.00 per month because he is unable to work due to his age or injury (this is just an example of what is going on). Now because of an illegal using his SS# he stops getting the only income he was receiving. John earned the SS income via years of putting into the SS system, now because an illegal using Johns SS# is showing that John has an income, this makes John ineligible to receive the SS income he needs, earned and deserves. Screw those people right, think about it. There are no victimless crimes.
WAYAN,TOM,DON- WHO IS NEXT, PLEASE, someone who reasonable if not about immigration itself at least about enforcing the LAWS of this COUNTRY. I can do this all day, because there is no benifit to amnesty/illegal immigration. A third grader can tell you that. According to CNN the unemployment rate in the U.S. is 5% and the percentage of illegal employment in the U.S. is 5%, thats CNN news reporting the the home of Anderson (I hate religion) Cooper.
How about this North of the U.S. border (or South of the border, to me)Canada, yes socialist, free-health care, maple syrup pouring, round bacon eating Canada has said they have had enough. Canada has gotten rid of ANCHOR BABIES, how about that. Just a small (really not that small) step but a vital one.
When a expectant mother in this country gives birth on U.S. soil back up the WELFARE trucks for the next 18 years. At least going the anchor baby route generates an actual legal SS#, you have to love the Gov’t.
L Brown, all of your arguments thus far can be equally applied to citizens of the US who are not wealthy. Should we cut them off, too?
Also, L Brown, economic theory suggests that there’s never 100% employment. It just doesn’t happen. There are multiple types of unemployment, even, and statistics don’t often break them down. I would suggest that much of the unemployment in the US is frictional, structural, cyclical and technological, most of which isn’t entirely undesireable. We’re not a place with Marxian unemployment, or Classical unemployment, honestly.
Tom,
Psychological theory suggests that L Brown has now lost all understanding of reason or connection to logic, in fact, he’s foaming-mouthed obstinate now that the word “illegal” is mixed with the word “immigration”.
In other words, he proved the whole point of my proposition in this post.
WAYAN,TOM,DON- WHO IS NEXT, PLEASE, someone who reasonable if not about immigration itself at least about enforcing the LAWS of this COUNTRY.
I’m happy to discuss this issue till the cows come home, but if you’re going to get off onto a slavish we-should-just-follow-and-accept-all-laws kick we may as well stop now. In the history of this country we’ve had laws that range from supporting owning people as property, banning black-white marriage, interring innocent Japanese citizens during WW2, making consensual oral sex between a man and wife a jailable offense and you still can’t legally get yourself a vibrator in Texas.
So just because someone makes something a law doesn’t mean I will or should respect it.
1) In response to Tom’s statement of
L Brown, all of your arguments thus far can be equally applied to citizens of the US who are not wealthy. Should we cut them off, too?
Here is the difference U.S. CITIZENS are here LEGALLY.
2) Tom, I agree with you about there never being 100% employment, it will never happen in a FREE-SOCIETY. Marxian unemployment (defined as: the reserve army of the unemployed — is normally needed in order to maintain work discipline in jobs, keep wages down, and protect business profitability) Classical unemployment (defined as:the number of job-seekers exceeds the number of vacancies. However, the problem here is not aggregate demand failure. In this situation, real wages are higher than the market-equilibrium wage). Congrats Tom you were able to use to terms which are completely illrelevant to 99% of the American Society. But I’ll address them both. They are ideas, concepts, have no form or structure outside the confines of your business 101 classroom. Believe it or not we used to make most of our own goods and American Companies thrived with the use of a very small number of illegals.
Foaming at the mouth. I provided a fiscal account of why illegal immigrants do not benifit my community, based on several studies. Can a foaming at the mouth person do such a thing. You provided a, well, nothing except stating big business gets rich(er) from illegal workers. I could have never came to such a conclusion. GREAT WORK TOM and by the way 2+2=4.
But I do agree not all laws provide Justice, if that is what you meant by your last statement.
However, regarding your (partial) sentence of:
‘but if you’re going to get off onto a slavish’, wait the word ’slavish’ is incorrect (laws through out history don’t benifit slaves) what you meant to say was ‘if I was going to have an automaton mindset in regards to the law’ (that makes more sense and would have extend your use of useless big words which no one uses. Poor attempt Tom, WAYAN made more sense, correction he is just as confused as you.
I do agree with your point of ‘we may as well stop this now’ you have no valid points and like WAYAN the more you write the more you expose your weak, factless based ideas.
Befor you go (tail between legs, head hung low) show your counter points to my examples.
1)American who hires legal workers at $12.00 per hour being for forced out of business by a American who hires illegals for $8.00 per hour. How did you explain this being good for America?
2)John in Kansas, who stopped collecting Social Security because an illegal stole/bought/uses (pick the one which offends you the least) his Social Security. How is this situation good for America and it is happening.
Don’t run TOM the readers want to know prior to making their ‘we are all immigrants’ sign (Oh yeah I don’t come from immigrant stock legal/illegal or otherwise, my ancestors were captives, so I guess we are all not immigrants).
P.S. have WAYAN and DON help you answer those 2 simple questions. IF YOU DON’T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS YOUR READERS WILL KNOW YOU HAVE NO POINT AND THERE IS NOTHING POSITIVE TO BE GAINED BY AMNESTY/ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and not enforcing the laws.
L Brown, your attempts here have been fairly uncivil, and while I appreciate that you have some points that are valid, I’d prefer to keep things civil, if you please.
Regarding the two examples:
1) The markets that exist for $8hr employees are the ones that are full of unskilled labor. If we can train more people out of the unskilled labor pool (which we should do!), it’s not really an issue, is it? As it stands, I-9 violations cost you $25k a pop, so we’re not going to see Illegals showing up at BestBuy or Target or any medium-sized business. Where we see employment of illegal/undocumented immigrants is in the construction business and in restaurants (and then, not in the chains, generally) because there are…more lenient business practices in place.
If we could improve enforcement in these two markets, much regarding the situation would change. But, is the addition of twenty new agents, in every metropolitan city in America, handling enforcement of Immigration law a cost-effective solution? 20 agents x $50k/yr = $1M/year. Now assume they need offices, and infrastructure and we’re looking at double the cost.
ICE enforcement is suddenly real expensive. If you offset this by the businesses you’ll run out of town (Housing Industry, Restaurant Industry), where’s the economic gain?
2) John in Kansas won’t stop receiving SS because someone steals his SSN. It doesn’t work that way.
THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING THE VALIDITY OF MY POINTS. I DO NOT LIE SINCE THE TRUTH IS SO EASY TO SEE.
Tom B. I appologize for seeming to be rude, it’s just my country at stake, my children’s future and my survival in middle class America. Note to WAYAN, I’m not ‘foaming at the mouth’never was, TOM does everyone have to play nice or just me.
In response to paragraph 1:
Why should my tax dollars go to teach an illegal how to do my job? I can’t understand that logic. I would also like to point out that wal-mart paid 11 million dollars for having used illegal clean up crews. I don’t want to lump ‘Bestbuys or Target in with the wal-marts of the world in using illegal labor, but…. who knows.
20 new agents in every city is a joke. That is like fighting a forest fire with a water pistol. I have a solution on how to provide adequate Custom/Border enforcement with out costing the American Public one dime. If I may:
1) The gov’t has to re-classify the job positions of the 100,000 employees it has employed in the most wasteful organization ever created by the U.S. government. To get down to it, the Gov’t needs to get rid of TSA (transpo security admin. Prior to 9/11 airport ’screening was a job done by the private sector. Now its done by the feds. For every 1 employee in the private sector the gov’t employs 4+ at tax payers expense. Think about this: if TSA had been created before 9/11/01 the events of that day would have still taken place. The items the terrorist took on those planes were allowed. In short the problem was the rules, not who was running the screening points at the airports. The Gov’t needs to return airport screening back to the private sector!
Paragraph 3
To think that enforcing the laws would run businesses like the Housing Industry, Restaurant Industry out of town, is stating that they couldn’t exist with out illegal immigration, not true. I live in AK I use hotels for busness meeting and social events and they use very, very few hispanics, how do they stay in business with out the illegals, how? MAGIC.
Final paragraph
From what I have heard You are completely wrong yes it does. If your benifits revolve around your income, yes it does. I have tried to get final verification via the Social Security Admin, to actually talk to a person is hard to do. So far what I can positively confirm is if your payments stop you have to initiate any type of corrective action with them, they WILL NOT correct the problem for you. When I have more time I will get a answer in gov’t writing for the readers, they demand the truth.