US Immigration-The Choice:A Wall or a Money Machine.

Hmmm. Still no responses. ... .

Here's Krugman this morning:

North of the Border
By PAUL KRUGMAN
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free," wrote Emma Lazarus, in a poem that still puts a lump in my throat. I'm proud of America's immigrant history, and grateful that the door was open when my grandparents fled Russia.

In other words, I'm instinctively, emotionally pro-immigration. But a review of serious, nonpartisan research reveals some uncomfortable facts about the economics of modern immigration, and immigration from Mexico in particular. If people like me are going to respond effectively to anti-immigrant demagogues, we have to acknowledge those facts.

First, the net benefits to the U.S. economy from immigration, aside from the large gains to the immigrants themselves, are small. Realistic estimates suggest that immigration since 1980 has raised the total income of native-born Americans by no more than a fraction of 1 percent.

Second, while immigration may have raised overall income slightly, many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration ?- especially immigration from Mexico. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. The most authoritative recent study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration.

That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants do "jobs that Americans will not do." The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays ?- and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants.

Finally, modern America is a welfare state, even if our social safety net has more holes in it than it should ?- and low-skill immigrants threaten to unravel that safety net.

Basic decency requires that we provide immigrants, once they're here, with essential health care, education for their children, and more. As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, "We wanted a labor force, but human beings came." Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the benefits they receive.

Worse yet, immigration penalizes governments that act humanely. Immigrants are a much more serious fiscal problem in California than in Texas, which treats the poor and unlucky harshly, regardless of where they were born.

We shouldn't exaggerate these problems. Mexican immigration, says the Borjas-Katz study, has played only a "modest role" in growing U.S. inequality. And the political threat that low-skill immigration poses to the welfare state is more serious than the fiscal threat: the disastrous Medicare drug bill alone does far more to undermine the finances of our social insurance system than the whole burden of dealing with illegal immigrants.

But modest problems are still real problems, and immigration is becoming a major political issue. What are we going to do about it?

Realistically, we'll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill immigrants. Mainly that means better controls on illegal immigration. But the harsh anti-immigration legislation passed by the House, which has led to huge protests ?- legislation that would, among other things, make it a criminal act to provide an illegal immigrant with medical care ?- is simply immoral.

Meanwhile, Mr. Bush's plan for a "guest worker" program is clearly designed by and for corporate interests, who'd love to have a low-wage work force that couldn't vote. Not only is it deeply un-American; it does nothing to reduce the adverse effect of immigration on wages. And because guest workers would face the prospect of deportation after a few years, they would have no incentive to become integrated into our society.

What about a guest-worker program that includes a clearer route to citizenship? I'd still be careful. Whatever the bill's intentions, it could all too easily end up having the same effect as the Bush plan in practice ?- that is, it could create a permanent underclass of disenfranchised workers.

We need to do something about immigration, and soon. But I'd rather see Congress fail to agree on anything this year than have it rush into ill-considered legislation that betrays our moral and democratic principles.

============
Debate begins this morning in the US Senate...

Joe

I have always posted the same response on this topic. I favor letting them in. If some idiots make it a felony to enter illegally, we could in theory have a million new prisoners to feed for years to come, instead of out there working.

I continue to whine the same old tune, as some a2k members have stated.

I work in the agricultural industry. Americans don't realize how much more they would have to pay for their food if Americans were picking it, if we could even find Americans to do the picking.

I've worked with Mexican crews and American crews in landscaping- the Mexicans are the best. I've seen 18 year old, football playing, healthy American boys wilt out in the sun after a couple of hours, the Mexican guys are like Cyborgs - you have to make them take a break. They never complain, they are always polite and they don't ask to take the day off to have a BBQ at the beach. Most young Americans would rather make minimum wage working in an air conditioned mall than do physical labor that pays $15 an hour.

If the rich politicians want their lawns mowed and their gardens weeded, they better get rid of this idea that immigrants are criminals.

I do think there should be regulation, but the idea of making wanting a better life a felony is a crime unto itself.

We need more than cheap labor; we need sustainable labor.

Allowing illegal immigration and winking at the law is a poor policy.

Moreover, this policy is contributing to quite a few deaths as illegals try to cross some of the harshest terrain in the US.

I think there needs to be a some commitment, some expressed desire to be a part of this nation, not just a need to make some dollars and go home, in order to be allowed to stay here for longer than two years.

I have not thought this through, it is a gut reaction.

Joe(need more thinking)Nation

Immigration
It was once said by a group of sage and sagacious young men gathered in
the desert to molt that "opinions are like ass**les, everybody has one"
This was later expounded upon by that same group of bored stiff
wisemen. They further determined that "every ass**le has an opinion" As
proof of this postulate I will offer mine on the subject of
immigration.

There are two camps in this country on this subject. Thoses who are in
favor of sending every immigrant back where they came from especially
if it was south of the border, and those who would formulate somekind
of guest worker program.

Neither of these addresses the real issue exposed by the immigration
guestion. That issue is jobs. People come here because there are jobs.
Jobs that pay better than in their home country. Perhaps? But jobs none
the less. Jobs that American citizens can and would do? In many cases,
I doubt it!

Living in California's Central Valley for nearly 20 years has given me
at least anacodotal evidence that tending the crops is not on the short
list of jobs for any Gringo. Not even the high school students out for
summer break want to brave the 100+ degree days pruning and trimming
and picking in the groves for, often times, less than minimum wage.

There is no shame in working the fields or cleaning hotel rooms. There
is shame, however, in working for anything other than a living wage.
The shame is on the employer. Paying a worker enough to keep them out
of poverty is not only the right thing to do but it is wholly a
Judeo-Christian value that too many hypocritical Christians seem to
want to overlook.

So what is the solution? Simple! Mandate a living wage(as opposed to the minimum wage). Those here legally and those born here will gravitate to these jobs and those here illegally will be forced to return home. But, there is one other piece to this puzzle. Mandate the harshest penalties to any employer who either doesn't pay a living wage or hires an illegal immigrant.

It must be said that I put the blame for this problem on the employers
who take advantage of the illegal's status and exploit them and the
politicians who have turned a blind eye to the problem. It is not the
immigrant, I am the descendent of immigrants, that I am singling out,
it is those who keep the "open for businees" sign lit that I have a
problem with. Let the immigrant apply for entry legally and I will
welcome them.

The readers and writers of this thread went over to
this one.

Re: US Immigration-The Choice:A Wall or a Money Machine.

You say that as if making money hand over first is a bad thing. But it isn't -- I'd like to practice it myself if I knew how to.

My answer to illegal immigration is the same as my answer to illegal Marijuana smoking and mushroom munching: Legalize it.


To receive my Green Card, I had to sign that I am going to follow the laws of the US and that I am not eligible for any welfare, medicaid, or similar payments. Needless to say, that doesn't mean I'm excused from paying payroll tax, or any of the other taxes that pay for the welfare and Medicaid bills of Americans. What more of a commitment would you ask of me before I can come?

Re: Immigration

But those immigrants are working for a living wage, as shown by the fact that they're not dying.


The immigrants' former employers in Latin America were Catholics, and they paid them substantially less than American ranchers do. Are you saying all Latin American employers are hypocritical Christians?


I don't understand the distinction. Please help me understand it.


Why legislate morality in the workroom? What goes on between two consenting grown-ups is entirely their business.


What do you mean by "exploited", other than the fact that their wage is lower than what you think they should get? And why would those immigrants prefer to be exploited by American employers over going home? Why would they risk their lives coming to America in the first place? It all makes so little sense to me.

Thomas,

It is easy being flip from the seat in front of your computer. It becomes harder when you are working in the blazing heat (I lived in the Central Valley of California for 17 years and the temps in the summer, which began in May were always in the 98 to 106 range) for less than poverty wages and haad to pay a labor contractor just to get the work.

The treatment of laborers in Latin America is an issue for Latin American governments to address. They won't though, because like our government, they are bought by the wealthy. The piece of this that you don't see is that if we let the weatlhy farmers continue to pay these workers as they do, other employers will get the idea (as they have) that they can have cheap labor too.

A living wage is a wage that is enough to keep a family above the nationally published poverty line. I am hazy about the exact number but it is more than these field laborers will ever see under the current regime.

Legislating morality is not the issue. Abiding by the law is. It is not an act of immorality to hire an illegal immigrant, it is an act of lawlessness. As for two consenting adults, an illegal immigrant is not a consenting adult he is a man with a need and no protection. You seem to espouse a laissez-faire attitude about controls of business. You probably don't remember what the Airlines were like before they were deregulated. Or perhaps the trucking industry. It is the role of society to protect its members. Even though these people are not legally members of our society, the treatment they receive is reflective of the treatment we believe we ourselves deserve.

Perhaps, there will come a time (and I sincerely hope you never have to face it) when you will have the option between merely surviving and starvation. If they stay in the countries south of our border, they could starve. If they come here under the current situation, they won't starve, but they won't thrive either.

As for penalizing employers who hire illegals, it seems to me a better way to stem the tide of this ever growing problem. If there are no jobs for them, they won't come! If the jobs are elevated to a monetary level above the poverty line, these will be filled by those who are here legally and by that group of Americans who won't do those jobs.

It is my opinion that we will never solve this problem because the wealthy among us thirst for cheap labor and the source of that labor (without threat of unions or demands for benefits) is the illegal immigrant

Missed this the first time around... but Thomas's response is worth revisiting...

Can you provide some example to back your statement?

It didn't work that way in many countries I know, even though these countries have pretty comfortable minimum wages...

Hey Francis,
She can't, and would be unlikely to respond, even if she could, since she hasn't posted in over a year. :wink:

Oy, Bill, I didn't notice that, thanks!

Oh, right, this one. I left it in the meantime. So much heat, so little light.