What should be done about illegal immigration?

When the Feds raided those Swift meat packing plants in Nebraska, a sizable chunk of the work force there were arrested or fled--up to 10% or more in some plants. So what happened then? Swift raised their wages $2 to $3 an hour and voila! Legal immigrants and US citizens lined up to apply for those jobs and Swift has had no problem filling them.

Who benefitted? The people who were already working legally benefitted. The legal immigrants and U.S. citizens who were formerly on the unemployment roles or working for grossly substandard wages benefitted. And the communities where those plants are located benefitted.

The rest of us may pay a few cents a pound more for our meat cuts, but it has been several months since the raids, and I have noticed no painful jump in meat prices.

I am guessing that will happen in California and other fruit and vegetable producing areas, too. Wages will be increased sufficiently to lure folks off unemployment or other government subsidies and that increases wages for those already working and the communities where the workers live will benefit from productive people with cash to spend.

The rest of us may pay a dime or so more for a head of lettuce or a pound of spinach, but we won't really miss a little more there either if we even notice it.

If there aren't enough workers out there to fill jobs vacated by illegals, you can bet that much pressure will be put on Washington to come up with a guest worker program post haste. I haven't seen that happening, however. Have you?

0 Replies

The most important issue in the immigration debate is compassion, so this is a bit of a tangent, but...

Your view of economics is as simplistic as it is biassed. The fact is farmers are hurting, and higher prices will drive customers to foreign grown suppliers. There have already been lost crops (that have rotted in the fields) because the cost to pick them using the inflated wages you are suggesting were higher than the price they can sell them for. If the price gets too high, the customers either go out of country... or just do without.

If the cost of fast food goes up too much, customers will stop eating out and American jobs will be lost... not gained.

The price of housing is the most interesting example since "illegal" workers are such an important part of the construction business. First of all, "illegal" workers are considered skilled workers and can command a good wage. (The farms are now competing with the construction industry). The fact that Americans won't even take these good paying skilled jobs is an indication that there really is a labor shortage.

But, contrary to your simple view of economics... the price of constructing houses is already to high. The cost of housing is already rising beyond the means of many people. (Of course you might wrongly argue that kicking 12 million people out would solve the housing crisis... but of course this doesn't make sense because anyone who can buy a house is already contributing enough to the economy to warrant it).

But the argument that housing costs are too low is, of course, silly.

The truth is the economics facts are complex... but most non-biassed economists say that the illegal immigrants are either a zero effect... or a small benefit to the overall economy.

But this is just a side track.

The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

The most important issue in the immigration debate is compassion, so this is a bit of a tangent, but...
The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

and yet when i asked you about the harlems, appalachia and new orleans. you announced that my post "was full of it".

you are every bit as selective in your dispensing of "compassion" as you are in your obsession that, apparently, the only illegal immigrants worthy of discussion come across the southern border from mexico.

never china. the u.k., the islands, armenia... pick a place. there are people from that place that are in the u.s. illegally.

you really love to wave the banner of multiculturism, but you only talk about mexico. why is that ?

nope. the issue isn't compassion. the issue is people entering the u.s. illegally.

0 Replies

E Browne wrote.

Quote:

The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

Yes, they haven't murdered or raped or robbed. At least most of them. However they have broken the law.
It is about time you acknowledge it. It is not up to you or for that matter the trespasser to make the judgment regarding which law to obey and which to ignore.

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

ebrown_p wrote:
The most important issue in the immigration debate is compassion, so this is a bit of a tangent, but...
The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

and yet when i asked you about the harlems, appalachia and new orleans. you announced that my post "was full of it".

you are every bit as selective in your dispensing of "compassion" as you are in your obsession that, apparently, the only illegal immigrants worthy of discussion come across the southern border from mexico.

never china. the u.k., the islands, armenia... pick a place. there are people from that place that are in the u.s. illegally.

you really love to wave the banner of multiculturism, but you only talk about mexico. why is that ?

nope. the issue isn't compassion. the issue is people entering the u.s. illegally.

First, I am a progressive globalist. I believe that we should act in such a way to help people globally. This is an immigration thread so in this thread I am talking about immigration. But, if you want to have compassion for people around the world... you need to think globally.

Second, what the heck are you talking about in the Mexico thing?

My comments have allways (there may be an exception) addressed toward all immigrants. I know illegal immigrants from Ireland (there is a "legalize the Irish" organization that is part of the larger immigration rights movement that is very active in Boston).

There are also a decent number of Hatians and Asians. I believe all of these groups deserve the same consideration and comassion.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

E Browne wrote.

Quote:
The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

Yes, they haven't murdered or raped or robbed. At least most of them. However they have broken the law.
It is about time you acknowledge it. It is not up to you or for that matter the trespasser to make the judgment regarding which law to obey and which to ignore.

I acknowledge it. These people have broken a law.

There are many people who on this very discussion who have admitted to breaking the law. If you smoke a joint, I don't have any real need to see you jailed (or your family broken).

Of course you are wrong when you say it is not up to me to make the judgement... I am American and I am part of the group who choses the representatives who make the laws, decide on penalties and implement enforcement measures.

You don't respect American voters much.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

au1929 wrote:
E Browne wrote.

Quote:
The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

Yes, they haven't murdered or raped or robbed. At least most of them. However they have broken the law.
It is about time you acknowledge it. It is not up to you or for that matter the trespasser to make the judgment regarding which law to obey and which to ignore.

I acknowledge it. These people have broken a law.

There are many people who on this very discussion who have admitted to breaking the law. If you smoke a joint, I don't have any real need to see you jailed (or your family broken).

Of course you are wrong when you say it is not up to me to make the judgement... I am American and I am part of the group who choses the representatives who make the laws, decide on penalties and implement enforcement measures.

You don't respect American voters much.

Good points. Society and technology are changing the way we live faster and faster every day, yet our laws are slow to change with the times.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

au1929 wrote:
E Browne wrote.

Quote:
The real issue here is compassion-- treating decent people who haven't broken any law more serious than crossing a border with decency and human understanding.

Yes, they haven't murdered or raped or robbed. At least most of them. However they have broken the law.
It is about time you acknowledge it. It is not up to you or for that matter the trespasser to make the judgment regarding which law to obey and which to ignore.

I acknowledge it. These people have broken a law.

There are many people who on this very discussion who have admitted to breaking the law. If you smoke a joint, I don't have any real need to see you jailed (or your family broken).

Of course you are wrong when you say it is not up to me to make the judgement... I am American and I am part of the group who choses the representatives who make the laws, decide on penalties and implement enforcement measures.

You don't respect American voters much.

That is complete and utter BS. The law of the land put in place by our elected representatives , if the American voter is to be respected, must be obeyed. It is not up to you or I to decide which we will obey and which we will ignore. You seem to be no you are of the opinion that tour approval is required to validate a law.

0 Replies

Yes none among us has never broken a law whether it was speeding or blowing a stop sign or failing to keep adequate records to support a tax deduction. Probably all of us stole something as a kid or have taken a postage stamp or paper clip at the office without paying for it. Jay walking is no big deal or maybe we leave our car idling in the handicapped zone for a few seconds while we run in to grab something.

The reason we can be law breakers and still denounce breaking the immigration laws without being hypocrites is because none of us are demanding that our transgressions be overlooked, ignored, or forgiven without consequence. Not one of us is happy about getting a speeding ticket or being fired if we steal too much time from the boss or having our car towed out of that handicapped zone. We may be happy when we don't get caught. But we aren't claiming that we should be above the law and not subject to the consequences for breaking it either. Also, when speeding becomes an unacceptable problem or the handicapped have no place to park, we are usually at the front of the line demanding that the law do something about it.

Only those who think the police should not enforce traffic laws or handicapped zones or that people should be allowed to decide for themselves what taxes they will or will not pay or that no other rules, regulations, or laws should be enforced can reasonably argue that immigration laws should not be enforced.

0 Replies

Fox, One of the very few times I agree with your analysis re: "breaking the law."

0 Replies

Increasingly, our porous borders are promoting illegal drug importation and criminality. Moreover, criminals and, possibly, terrorists are pouring into our country. All this argues for fences and other measures.

To discourage future waves of IAs, we should begin to expel the IAs we can find in the country.

0 Replies

Advocate, I'm against any kind of "fence" at our borders. For one, the cost doesn't justify the benefit; there are still other ways of entering the country legally (that terrorists can use) and "illegally." Law enforcement is the only thing needed to control our borders.

0 Replies

CI
Fences make for good neighbors. Were it my decision to make I would fence off the entire southern border. And place security systems along it's length. It would save on manpower and costs in the long run. And avoid conflicts between the unlawful entries and our border patrol people. If we do not control our borders the entire discussion relative to disposition and control of Illegal aliens is mute.

0 Replies

au, Why do you think we continue to have an influx of illegals coming into the US? Fences have been penetrated.

0 Replies

CI
The wouldn't have if they were adequate and well policed. As to their being a deterrent to entry. It should be noted that the point of entry for most of the illegals has shifted to a point where there are no fences. Yes, they are effective and could be made even more so.
The point being made that without control of our border the illegal alien problem will persist and continue to grow.

0 Replies

San diego CA to Brownsville Tx is approximately 1550 miles of the most desolate foreboding unroaded unaccessable terrain in north america. A fence, yeah that's the ticket just build a fence;

http://www.theculturedtraveler.com/Parks/Images/Big_Bend.jpg

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

San diego CA to Brownsville Tx is approximately 1550 miles of the most desolate foreboding unroaded unaccessable terrain in north america. A fence, yeah that's the ticket just build a fence;

I assume by that there are no border crossings possible at that point. If that being a fact. Than I concede that fences in that or those areas are not needed.

0 Replies

the above is texas/mexico border, here is arizona/mexico border;

http://www.reflectiveimages.com/images/GatesPassAreaTucson5x7.jpg

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

the above is texas/mexico border, here is arizona/mexico border;

Is that not the area where many who attempt to cross die in the attempt? If so it not the deterrent it appears to be.

Next you will probably tell me of the people in Texas that are against the fence because it will encroach on their land. The NAMBY rule will come into play. In any event the fence should be built wherever it is needed. It being a national problem, not a local one and must be treated as such. The illegals cross the border at those points but spread throughout the nation.

0 Replies

You cannot fence off the entire US/Mexican border. It is bad enough
what they've done here in San Diego. It only pushed the border crossers
further east into desert terrains, leaving them out there without any water or food supply. Every year hundreds of these poor people die either in
the winter cold or summer heat of the deserts of CA, AZ and TX.
It is so unnecessary! All they want is a better life for themselves and their
families.

Incidentially, as I was driving up the coast to Santa Barbara over the
weekend, there are a number of strawberry fields along the sides of the
freeway. The temperatures reached into the mid 80s and no American
would be caught dead out there, picking the strawberries. It is the
Mexicans who work long strenuous hours under such weather conditions,
picking strawberries.

One trip to El Centro and one can see firsthand that without the help of
Mexican labor, our entire agricultural support structure would be collapsing without them.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know