What should be done about illegal immigration?

You're wrong again Setanta and you apparently ignored the history on that I posted some time back on this thread. As I have no confidence you wouldn't ignore it again, I see no reason to post it again and will just do my best to ignore you.

0 Replies

Good lookin' out, Thomas, i was coming back to ask for the same information.

****************************************

When this thread started, i immediately responded with the observation that the poll was biased. Since then, it has slowly, but inoxerably become apparent that Fox has an obsessional focus on the illegality of the persons who come here, but absolutely no interest in the illegality of the people who employ them. Her only focus is on the illegality of those persons being here. She has ignored the point made again and again that the law can be changed, and their illegality would vanish. She is interested in no solution which involves punishing those who illegally employ them.

It is obvious that her focus is a racist objection to one sort of "illegality," while blandly ignoring the illegality of the employers.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
But you are right. As long as illegals are willing to work for substandard wages, there will be a huge demand for illegals. Take the illegals out of the equation, however, and voila, the wages will go up as employers are required to offer a decent wage to lure workers to do the work. And yes, we will all pay a bit more for a head of lettuce or a pound of oranges but not enough more that we will stop buying lettuce and oranges.

You appear to be assuming supply and demand applies in the job market, but not in the products market. If so, that's an interesting economic theory.

Foxfyre wrote:
As I have said--and have posted substantial verification--attempts in the past to put the burden on the employers has not been effective for various reasons.

I must have missed the post where you outlined those various reasons. What were they again?

Many pages back where I commented on efforts to make the employers responsible during the Carter and Reagan administrations and posted at least a couple, maybe more, links to discussions about that. As I was responsible for a workforce of up to 70+ during that era, I know of what I speak.

How did you conclude that I said that what applies to supply and demand in the wage market does not include the product market? I thought I was pretty specific that an increase in the cost of labor results in an increase in the cost of product. I am reasonably secure that I am quite correct about that.

I do not think that removing illegal workers from the equation would have a significantly detrimental effect on either provided we did adopt a legal means for people from other countries to come here to work legally. The net result I think would be higher wages for the illegals but with a side effect that depression of wages for others would be decreased which would offset the higher cost. You have some higher cost for product and labor, but overall, everybody benefits.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

How did you conclude that I said that what applies to supply and demand in the wage market does not include the product market? I thought I was pretty specific that an increase in the cost of labor results in an increase in the cost of product. I am reasonably secure that I am quite correct about that.

You also said the rising price will not make people stop apple. This statement is sufficiently vague to be correct under some interpretations. But it seems to downplay that some apples will not be eaten, even though people are willing to buy it at a price at which other people are willing to grow, pick, and sell them.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

You're wrong again Setanta and you apparently ignored the history on that I posted some time back on this thread. As I have no confidence you wouldn't ignore it again, I see no reason to post it again and will just do my best to ignore you.

No, you are wrong--as always. Your post, which was not relevant to mine, does not alter the fact that you have subsequently claimed that no one responded to you, when in fact i had done so.

0 Replies

FoxFyre wrote:

But if I needed a job and in absence of any other available work, I would do it until I got fired for being so slow.

Thats exactly what inmigrants think, I guess.

Cheri Amour commented that a solution would be to convince Mexico on actually raising the quality of life, creating workstations, etc. Well, I think they are convinced, and supposedly they are working on it... but it's just too many of them. Plus, the country needs the never-ending flow of dollars our inmigrants send, illegal or not.

The fence is already being built. I could see that in the desert near San Luis Rio Colorado. Its an interesting sight. A shiny Caterpillar manned by an american, and 10 meters up front, a poor mexican household.

0 Replies

Raiding companies that hire illegal inmigrants is being implemented as of right now. I'm wondering what criteria do they follow when targetting a company... let's see if they hit the crops soon.

CNN - Raids

0 Replies

Whom they hit and when would likely be conditioned in large measure by who pays what to whom at election time.

0 Replies

That reminds me of a local hotel here....
The owner of the hotel was also politically very well situated
and no one ever raided his hotel, who was full of undocumented workers.

However, when the political arena changed, his hotel was
once targeted and one could see hords of maids, waiters and
other personal running from the hotel while immigration was
in hot pursuit.

One look to El Centro gives a clear picture of who is working
there. No raid will take place there, ever! Raids are done
for political reason only - unfortunately at the suffering of
these undocumented workers.

0 Replies

Bingo . . .

0 Replies

CalamityJane wrote:

Raids are done
for political reason only...

That needs to change.

0 Replies

The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps said Thursday that they would begin building a security fence on land owned by supporters along the US-Mexico border if President Bush doesn't direct the government to do so.

Minuteman Border Fence Project

Six landowners in Arizona have offered to support the venture, and others in California, Texas, and New Mexico are also on board. The federal government owns most of the land directly on the border, however, so the group's construction can't be a complete solution. The group instead hopes to show the government that a fence is effective and economical.

Minutemen to Bush: Build Fence or We Will

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
How did you conclude that I said that what applies to supply and demand in the wage market does not include the product market? I thought I was pretty specific that an increase in the cost of labor results in an increase in the cost of product. I am reasonably secure that I am quite correct about that.

You also said the rising price will not make people stop apple. This statement is sufficiently vague to be correct under some interpretations. But it seems to downplay that some apples will not be eaten, even though people are willing to buy it at a price at which other people are willing to grow, pick, and sell them.

Well, I believe I said people will not stop buying lettuce and oranges if the price rises a bit due to field workers receiving a better wage. Price rise all the time anyway due to various ways that crops are damaged from storms, early freezes, etc. and people keep buying the stuff anyway. I can't see how somewhat higher prices due to other factors would change people's purchasing habits either.

I pay $1 or more for a head of lettuce now. I would pay $1.25 or $1.50 for the same lettuce but I might not pay $2.00, at least until I got used to the idea of $2 lettuce. Even doubling the wages of the workers will not double the price of a head of lettuce though.

I believe people stop buying stuff they don't really need if the prices rise sufficiently. They don't stop buying the stuff they do need unless they actually cannot afford it.

Another factor is that if some people switch to other products due to higher practices, there will still be more people earning better paychecks and able to afford to buy more stuff, and that should more than offset any temporary downside due to reasonably higher prices.

In other words, exploiting illegal labor may or may not be unfair to the illegals as nobody forces them to work for it. It is certainly a negative when it artificially depresses wages for those who are working legal or makes it difficult for produce growers to hire legal workers. The downside of the law of supply and demand is that those affected by it are forced to live by it or they go out of business.

It's pretty tough to all of a sudden expect the produce growers, as a group, or any other group of employers, to start abiding by immigration laws that the government has been ignoring for three decades now. But put policies into effect that keep the playing field level for everybody, and I think we can correct most of the problems without being unfair to anybody. I personally am still looking for what policies would accomplish that.

A substantial majority of Americans are opposed to anything that would even look like amnesty at this time, but its impossible to say how much they would react at the polls if Congress is unresponsive to that. This is one of those weird situations in which the American Left is aligned mostly with the President and conservatives are mostly on the opposite side of the fence.

0 Replies

I agree CJ.

Interesting, 150 bucks a foot of fence... Razz

0 Replies

el_pohl wrote:

FoxFyre wrote:
But if I needed a job and in absence of any other available work, I would do it until I got fired for being so slow.

Thats exactly what inmigrants think, I guess.

Cheri Amour commented that a solution would be to convince Mexico on actually raising the quality of life, creating workstations, etc. Well, I think they are convinced, and supposedly they are working on it... but it's just too many of them. Plus, the country needs the never-ending flow of dollars our inmigrants send, illegal or not.

The fence is already being built. I could see that in the desert near San Luis Rio Colorado. Its an interesting sight. A shiny Caterpillar manned by an american, and 10 meters up front, a poor mexican household.

Most heavy equipment operators around here are indeed Americans, but a good number of them are Mexican born or of recent Mexican ancestry. And they are Americans through and through.

I think most of us, regardless of country of origin, feel emotionally negative about a wall that separates people. Rather than a wall, I would personally prefer policies that made it unattractive and unprofitable for people to sneak into our country uninvited. As we have discussed, Mexico already has such policies and any Americans who go there uninvited, if caught, can expect rather stern treatment. I would imagine the sternness would increase if large numbers of Americans barged in uninvited and justifiably so.

What do you think el_pohl? If the poor families on your side of the border did not have the allure of a better life in the United States, do you think they would be more motivated to make life better where they are? Could they?

I compliment you on your excellent English by the way. My Spanish is sooooo poor I try to avoid using it unless I just absolutely have to. Fortunately the Spanish speakers who have to endure it are quite diplomatic. Smile

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
How did you conclude that I said that what applies to supply and demand in the wage market does not include the product market? I thought I was pretty specific that an increase in the cost of labor results in an increase in the cost of product. I am reasonably secure that I am quite correct about that.

You also said the rising price will not make people stop apple. This statement is sufficiently vague to be correct under some interpretations. But it seems to downplay that some apples will not be eaten, even though people are willing to buy it at a price at which other people are willing to grow, pick, and sell them.

What none of the would-be Robert Reiches here have considered is that the US is not the only place where these goods can be produced. At some prioce point, production would cease and the U S would no longer produce these items, depending on imports. Or the production would become very limited. Production would remain sufficient enough to provide the goods to the elite few could afford. It's like crab meat, there are enough crabs to go around to supply 100 times the current demand but crabs aren't picked because the demand for $20/lb crab meat is low. So the crabs are sold whole and people who like crab meat but can't afford the $20/lb premium pick the crabs themselves.

0 Replies

I agree, production would cease, as the profitability of
growing produce would be zilch. $ 2.00 for a head of lettuce will be paid for by the upper income class, the poor couldn't afford to eat salad and produce any longer. That would be utterly
wrong. Not to mention that proper nutrition is bad enough.....

0 Replies

I didn't realize that the countries production rested solely on the shoulders of illegal immigrants. What else besides produce is in such danger of skyrocketing costs that only the elitest of the elite will be able to afford it?

0 Replies

you mean the profit the farmers get from the government? Perhaps the farmers could always use machines? Think about the additional money that would be saved by removing illegals. The money being saved from social programs, the money that Americans could make that the illegals do for so much cheaper beacause they and their employer aren't paying taxes on the illegals working. I mean realy, Illegals are such a benifit to American society!

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

Thomas wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
How did you conclude that I said that what applies to supply and demand in the wage market does not include the product market? I thought I was pretty specific that an increase in the cost of labor results in an increase in the cost of product. I am reasonably secure that I am quite correct about that.

You also said the rising price will not make people stop apple. This statement is sufficiently vague to be correct under some interpretations. But it seems to downplay that some apples will not be eaten, even though people are willing to buy it at a price at which other people are willing to grow, pick, and sell them.

What none of the would-be Robert Reiches here have considered is that the US is not the only place where these goods can be produced. At some prioce point, production would cease and the U S would no longer produce these items, depending on imports. Or the production would become very limited. Production would remain sufficient enough to provide the goods to the elite few could afford. It's like crab meat, there are enough crabs to go around to supply 100 times the current demand but crabs aren't picked because the demand for $20/lb crab meat is low. So the crabs are sold whole and people who like crab meat but can't afford the $20/lb premium pick the crabs themselves.

This is an assertion which may or may not be true, but, in any case, is hardly an argument that the country shouldn't have immigration limits that are respected.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know