April 11, 2006
Darleen Gives Me a Run for My Money
I've been meaning to link
this entry since the collapse of the Roman Empire.
And if I'm ever home in a state other than one of total exhaustion, I'll have a response for her.
But she most certainly makes good points. Why, exactly, did I think I could tangle with her?
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:10 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Good link, but read the comments as well. AND While there are estimates of how many are here (11M), the people here today are not the same people as were here six months ago. Many work a season or two, return home to Mexico, come back again the next year. Every time the U S has tightened up the border, The illegals here have stayed instead of cycling home. They've been too afraid they wouldn't get back in the next year. Border control, in earlier attempts, didn't reduce the number here, just the rate of turnover.
Those promoting tighter control address the economic impact: excluding the low wage pool will drive pay rates up until America's unemployed take the jobs (To be reflected in higher food costs, but accept that change as a correction), or until capital investment makes the work less labor intensive (Why mechanize while labor's cheap?). I think these analyses correct but incomplete.
While wages and prices would reach a new equilibrium, the higher wages would be a greater incentive still, to break in to America. A year after reaching a new equilibrium in the economy, we'd reach a new equilibrium in the influx/outflux of illegal migrants.
Look at the amounts they already pay to coyotes and DMV clerks. The price is commensurate with the risk. We can try to tighten up, but we won't shut it off. Illegal immigration will just have higher margins on lower volumes. And not much smaller of a pool here.
Don't focus on the borders. Let people who believe the solution lays there do what they want. Spend no effort or emotion supporting or opposing.
We need, more immediately, to control employment in the U S.
We need, more importantly, for Mexico to develop. Economically, Industrially, Culturally. Reform of their power structures. Government, political parties, machismo raza.
Vicente Fox is better than those before, and better than today's alternatives. But there's much more to do.
America could face this next century with less anxiety and more security if we had a strong, healthy, respectable neighbor to the south.
Posted by: Ed at April 12, 2006 07:49 AM (qCS9x)
2
Geez, AG, you make me blush!
Ed, the problem is that right now there is no incentive for Mexico to change. Vicente Fox has even traveled to Canada with a "guest worker" proposal.
We have to tighten the border. Yes, it won't stop everyone, but if we at the same time invest in making our immigration system more streamlined and responsive, then there might be an incentive to go that route to citizenship than to cross back and forth for work alone.
Posted by: Darleen at April 12, 2006 12:04 PM (FgfaV)
3
OT:
We're not ignoring you, the archive and comment links in the post just above are broken.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg at April 12, 2006 06:24 PM (RobY9)
4
Your "comment" link to Wednesday's post isn't working. Or did you already know that? Don't you know that it is cruel to taunt? Of course 'we' "miss" you. But therein lies the dilemma...'we' want you to succeed in your current endeavor and there is nothing 'we' can do about your light posting. I don't know if methadone would cover that. I figured you would get your wind in about a week or two and find enough time for three short posts a day...About the same as before. And maybe add a few replies to the comments.
Posted by: Darrell at April 12, 2006 07:37 PM (bTiez)
5
Let me guess you are busy working for Ms. Rice, making a power point presentation for the UN, showing some mobile labs in Iran? A picture is a thousand words.
That would be the only excuse you are allowed, for being behind in your blog.
Posted by: Azmat Hussain at April 12, 2006 08:42 PM (ZyAUY)
6
Yes! and we are forced to scold you as best we can, just to contain our jazzed up giddy happiness for you. Because we wouldn't, you know, want you to figure that bit out. Blow our cool cover, and all. Eeek.
Posted by: k at April 13, 2006 05:16 PM (Ffvoi)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 05, 2006
Immigration Reprise
Glenn
publishes a handful of mail from people who are upset about our lopsided immigration "policy." But please note that a big part of the problem is how punishing the system is for those who want to immigrate "the right way." Fixing this is essential to the problem, which means we have to reform a bureaucracy.
And that's hard to do, but it's essential.
Right now, our attitude toward immigrants—whom we need, by the way, given our system of entitlements and falling birth rates—is, "welcome to the United States. Fuck you."
Posted by: Attila Girl at
01:05 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Dang, another fine post. I'm with you on the reforming the current method of legal immigration and the fact that we need more immigrants to support Social Security and Medicare. That is one possible part of the solution.
Posted by: Steve at April 05, 2006 07:52 PM (gxkTC)
2
"Right now, our attitude toward immigrants—whom we need, by the way, given our system of entitlements and falling birth rates—is, "welcome to the United States. Fuck you.""
Sorry you are totally wrong here. The United States welcomes immigrants. The problem I (and lot of people have) are illegal immigrants.
There's a difference between inviting someone into your home and someone moving in without your permission.
Honestly, there is a difference between legal immigrants and illegal. Legals ones try to assimulate. They try and learn about this country. Illegal ones don't seem to. You don't wave another country's flag if you are part of a new country.
So immigrants are welcome - my grandparents come over on boats. Illegal immigrants that break the laws coming here, that bypass people waiting in line are the problem.
Posted by: Nicholas at April 06, 2006 09:52 AM (0DrzM)
3
Nixon,Reagan, Bush 1,Bush 2.These republicans are all the same. Deny responsibility, Deny accountibility, case in point,Mr. Libby. And all you guys are going to talk about is other issues.
Allow me to predict! Bush will deny deny deny, call Libby a liar and say that it was a miscommunication.
Posted by: Azmat Hussain at April 06, 2006 08:41 PM (hDmNj)
4
Nicholas,
1) Would you concede that a legal immigration process that takes years and makes people jump through many hurdles unrelated to their level of security risk increases the temptation some may feel to circumvent the law?
2) Do you have anything to back up your assertion that the majority of illegal immigrants don't want to assimilate to American culture? Plenty of "illegals" speak English, for example. I realize that there are enclaves of people who only speak Spanish, but there are enclaves of people who only speak Korean as well. And Vietnamese.
3) Can you show me data that establishes huge proportions of those who participated in the protests organized by ANSWER were legitimately illegal immigrants? My impression is that a lot of young radicalized Latinos attended such rallies--students in particular. I suspect the vast, vast majority of the Latins at those rallies were legal. After all, real illegal immigrants aren't likely to go to rallies and call attention to themselves. Therefore, judging them by the actions of others who used them as a pretext for a demonstration seems rather silly.
If you have citations to back up your assertions, lay 'em on me.
Posted by: Attila Girl at April 06, 2006 10:29 PM (s96U4)
5
"1) Would you concede that a legal immigration process that takes years and makes people jump through many hurdles unrelated to their level of security risk increases the temptation some may feel to circumvent the law?"
I do agree with this. Of course I want a million dollars too, instead of working for it, it could also be easier to steal by this example. Yes, I agree people want to come to America and some are willing to risk anything for a better life. Yes, the system needs to be overhauled. Agreed.
But because the system is broken do you "go around it" as millions of people have done? I will always had a hard time giving these people amensty ahead of the people working hard to come to the country the right way.
"2) Do you have anything to back up your assertion that the majority of illegal immigrants don't want to assimilate to American culture? Plenty of "illegals" speak English, for example. I realize that there are enclaves of people who only speak Spanish, but there are enclaves of people who only speak Korean as well. And Vietnamese."
Agreed- there are people that only speak Korean, Vietnamese, Polish and other languages. I could ask you to define "plenty". I lived outside of Philadelphia for 20 years (growing up). People spoke other languages but still spoke enough english to get by. I know live in Houston TX where alot of signs are in Spanish. In fact, in some spots English isn't even available. The name of the soccer team was changed because from 1836 (the year Houston was founded) because it offended Mexican people. The story in the Alamo is being changed in schools. They celebrate Cino Di Milo (Mexican independence day) here. Does Mexico celebrate the 4th of July? If I moved to France, would I expect everyone to speak English to me? Would I expect them to celebrate my holidays for America? No. I would learn their language and culture.
Why do phones ask you if you speak Spanish now? Why is Spanish on most menus? Koren isn't ,Chinese isn't (expect in some areas). Why are there Spanish TV stations? Why are driver liscense tests given in Spanish?
If you want to assimulate, you learn that countries ways. That's what the term assimulate means. Alot of people are not trying be it from fear of being deported, to wanting to reclaim for Mexico, to just not caring.
Can we at least agree that to do well in American you need to speak English?
"3) Can you show me data that establishes huge proportions of those who participated in the protests organized by ANSWER were legitimately illegal immigrants? My impression is that a lot of young radicalized Latinos attended such rallies--students in particular. I suspect the vast, vast majority of the Latins at those rallies were legal. After all, real illegal immigrants aren't likely to go to rallies and call attention to themselves. Therefore, judging them by the actions of others who used them as a pretext for a demonstration seems rather silly."
Again, since I don't lie in LA I don't have numbers. View Michelle Malkin website for info there. I can tell you about what's happening in Texas cities and Houston area. Where signs about - this city belongs to Mexico, or "Europeans go home" or where the US flag is burned. Actually, I have Latino/Hispinic friends. They are distrubed by what they are seeing. They are torn by alot of what's going on. Goes back to assimulation - you don't fly another countries flag if you want to join in this country. You don't burn the US flag if you really want to be here. A student here - right or wrong - burned a Mexican flag in respond to a US flag being burned. He may be going to jail for 3 days, which the others are free.
- Did you see the racial groups out there today? Black Panthers, CAIR, Socialist republic.
- Yes Latino's are hard workers, family oriented people. They have alot of admirable qualities and no body should be viewed on a small sample size. But, the news is not showing what is actually going in in these rallies.
- There is also alot of hidden costs not talked about - stolen social security numbers (the government doesn't care if 3 people are using your SS but your credit will be destroyed) , illegal drivers, welfare costs, hospital costs (I have friends who work in the hospital that talk about people just leaving after treatment which than has to be passed on to others).
- It makes you think, when the Mexican governments gives help brochures to get into the USA. That they have armed guards on there north and south borders but help their citizens sneak in (because the estimate is that 20 billion gets send back to Mexico which is about 6 % GNP)
- Yes, there are no easy answers. Sending everyone back isn't right either. Of course, a concern that no-one is really talking about is the US is again making another slave race. People who work cheap, expect nothing and can't speak up.
Thanks for the civil discussion. Good luck at the new job.
Posted by: Nicholas at April 10, 2006 11:51 AM (0DrzM)
6
I just don't have anything to say. Not that it matters. Eh. I've just been staying at home doing nothing, but I don't care. That's how it is.
Posted by: Kaka44373 at April 20, 2006 01:52 AM (Ww5Aq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 04, 2006
More on Immigration
Steve Verdon has an interesting
post in Outside the Beltway that reflects a lot of my concerns on the question of "illegals." Please note that I do not regard all those who advocate sealing the borders as racists, but I have yet to hear a conversation about this on the radio that doesn't accommodate at least a few racists. Very often, callers on talk radio will say the most disgusting things about Mexican-Americans without being checked whatsoever by the host. After all, we're "all on one side in this thing." Which presumably means we should tolerate the racists. It makes me queasy, to tell you the truth.
Verdon's focus, however, is on the cost-benefit aspect of illegal immigration, regarding which Darleen and I have been playing verbal volleyball for some time. (You'll want to note here that Darleen's non-racist credentials are impeccable, though I wonder if her saturation exposure to the Latin underclass occasionally informs some of her views.)
I continue to believe that in order to address the problem, we must 1) secure the border; 2) streamline the legal immigration system for those who truly want to come here and assimilate; and 3) offer some sort of guest-worker program for young people who simply want to be here temporarily to make a few dollars, and then go home.
Typically [this morning's radio] discussion was about little Juanito and how much money it costs to educate this illegal child in the U.S. school system. Nothing was said about the work that JaunitoÂ’s parents do and the value such works adds to the economy. Nothing was discussed about the taxes paid. The true measure of the costs here should be the net costs, not the total costs.
So how much are the net costs of illegal immigration? This report from the GAO from 1995 (pdf) put the net costs at anywhere from $2 billion a year to $19 billion a year with an illegal population of 3 to 5 million. So even if we take the worse case scenario of 3 million immigrants and $19 billion in net costs and scale it up to todayÂ’s estimated population (say 12 million) we are talking about $80 billion in net costs. A middle of the road estimate would be around $50 billion. Either way I see this as chump-change for the most part.
First we have to remember that the U.S. economy is well over $12 trillion dollars in terms of GDP. Or in other words illegal immigration is equal to about 0.64% of GDP. By contrast the U.S. budget deficit is ten times larger as a percentage of GDP. Spending for the Medicare Prescirption Drug plan is going to cost $18.2 trillion.1 And Medicare, aside from the prescription drug program, has a shortfall in the range of $50 to $60 trillion over the next 75 years. But here we are worried about chump-change due to illegal immigration.
This leads me to, “Why?” The only thing I can think of is that things like Medicare shortfalls are boring and dull. After all it requires reading actuarial reports, figuring out what the taxable wage base is, and looking at projections which brings in things like statistics and already 48.3% of the audience is on the verge of a coma.
Nice, Steve. Some of us were paying attention, there.
Illegal immigration on the other hand seems to touch off some sort of fear of people who are different. They don’t look like “us”, the don’t talk like “us” and they eat all that weird food and dammit I can’t read the signs over the stores that cater to their consumption! So illegal immigration gets lots of attention, but the complete shambles that things like Medicare are in are just ignored. If we could just stem the flow of illegals why economic nirvana would result. Americans would go back to hanging drywall, mowing their own yards, and chopping up chickens. I’m even sure that controlling the U.S.-Mexico border would reverse the global downward trend in manufacturing employment.[/sarcasm]
In short, I see all this handwringing about the U.S. becoming part of Mexico as nothing more than misplaced priorities by people who seem deathly afraid of people who are different than them. The response to the charge of racism is often, “It isn’t racism! We just oppose illegal immigration. And the costs are real.” Sure the costs are real, but they are much smaller when compared to other issues such as Medicare funding. And sure illegal immigration isn’t a good thing, but instead suggest a guest worker program (i.e. make those illegal immigrants legal) and you still get the howling. So both objections, IMO, while technically true are just rhetoric to deflect criticism and hide the rather disquieting aspects of the illegal immigration movement.
Okay. So he's just as turned off by the Latino = bad thing as I am, and it looms large in his argument.
But the cost-benefit thing is relevant, and the huge resistance to guest-worker programs does set off a lot of red flags in terms of some of us feeling that there's a huge xenophobia out there, and/or a huge willingness to ascribe the recession we just went through (over the past five years) to a phenomenon that's been going on in one form or another for decades.
Tag, boys and girls. You're it.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
06:47 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 894 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Atilla Girl,
Hey thanks for the link and interesting read. I agree with your points 1 - 3. I think a national security approach to immigration works better and without the racist undertones that all too frequently I hear.
There is an interesting "literature survey article" from the Dallas Fed that I'm probably going to link to and blog about in regards to this issue. It looks at the costs as well as other issues (e.g. unskilled migrant labor might be a complement for skilled non-migrant labor thus raising the latter wage rates).
Basically the cost/benefit issue is complicated and it isn't something I hear many talk show hosts even scratch the surface of. Instead they go with the borwn = bad rhetoric that is all too common.
Posted by: Steve at April 05, 2006 01:15 PM (RHjU5)
2
Or the "how DARE they?"
Or the "these people are ilLLLEEEEEGGAAAALLL!" (Yes. We knew that: hence the term "illegal immigrant." Pot's illegal, too, but plenty of people smoke it. Now what?)
Posted by: Attila Girl at April 05, 2006 03:56 PM (s96U4)
3
How much would it cost to not educate little Juanito?
Posted by: Alan Kellogg at April 06, 2006 05:57 AM (uC/tz)
4
I haven't been up to anything these days. So it goes. I can't be bothered with anything these days.
Posted by: Kaka59614 at April 20, 2006 01:52 AM (8A6vK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
42kb generated in CPU 0.0762, elapsed 0.2043 seconds.
209 queries taking 0.1859 seconds, 427 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.