How the US/Mexico immigration debate should perhaps be framed

[DrCube]

@DrDeth

It is. But even America has just so much water and other natural resources, every person means more polution and less land. And, these dudes come in at the bottom, where they are a drain on the tax budget- every poor person costs one of us in the middle class quite a bit in extra taxe- and costs the rich even more.

Like most economic problems, there is no easy answer.

You know, I hate posting in GD just to find out what the arguments against something are. To be honest, I think this is the first time I’ve actually heard an argument against unlimited immigration that wasn’t “make them come it legally just like the rest of us!”

So, basically, you are saying that we have too many poor people and we don’t need to let in anymore? And the reason it is bad to have too many poor people is because the rest of us support them with taxes? I can agree here. But if you ask me, that means we have a problem with taxes (and welfare) and a problem with people having children they can’t support. Sure these problems are hard to fix. But spending money on problem of our own creation, illegal immigration, doesn’t seem to be helping; indeed, it seems to be multiplying our problems for no gain.

I say, let in anybody who wants to come who isn’t a fleeing felon and focus all that money and effort we save into solving the problems of too much poverty.

[Quartz]

Perhaps America could simply conquer Mexico (and perhaps further south as far as Panama), make them part of America - but not Statehood, not immediately anyway - and install governments that are democratic and relatively free from corruption? I bet it would be far easier than Iraq.

[BrainGlutton]

@According to Pliny

We import millions from next door now. Don’t you read the papers?

But how many of those are middle-class and/or professional? Didn’t you read the OP?

[BrainGlutton]

@Quartz

Perhaps America could simply conquer Mexico (and perhaps further south as far as Panama), make them part of America - but not Statehood, not immediately anyway - and install governments that are democratic and relatively free from corruption? I bet it would be far easier than Iraq.

Perhaps. But honest government in Mexico and Central America would not be in our government’s (i.e., would not be in the American business community’s) interests.

[Lemur866]

@BrainGlutton

Perhaps. But honest government in Mexico and Central America would not be in our government’s (i.e., would not be in the American business community’s) interests.

Bullshit. Honest government might be against the interests of a few oligarchs, but “business” as a group needs honest government to work. With dishonest government you have one business that pays the bribes and competitors are kept out. Sure, that one business has no interest in honest government, but every other business in existance does.

Dishonest government means crime, it means lawlessness, it means contracts are unenforceable, it means infrastructure is unreliable or nonexistant, it means you are at the mercy of the whims of the political bosses. Sure, it also means that you can enslave peasants, but dirt cheap labor is meaningless unless you can also safely get the raw materials to the factory, parts, electricity, water,and ship finished goods out. This is why international corporations don’t set up factories in Africa, even though they could pay workers there a fraction of what they pay in Mexico or China. You need ports, you need predictability, you need workers with a certain attitude towards work (that is, dirt poor subsistance farmers make good proletarian workers. Masai cattle herders wouldn’t).

[Morfane]

The idea is that those who wish to come by legal means only but cannot would be a net benefit to the US. This includes both professionals and the lower-middle class (I’d imagine that the affluent would have no problem moving to the US today if they so desired).

[magellan01]

@DrCube

I say, let in anybody who wants to come who isn’t a fleeing felon and focus all that money and effort we save into solving the problems of too much poverty.

How do you plan to identify who the fleeing felons are?

[DrCube]

@magellan01

How do you plan to identify who the fleeing felons are?

Check their passport and ask the home country?

I’m not saying there should be no paperwork at all to get here. At the least we need to know who’s entering the country. I just don’t think citizenship should be a decade long gauntlet that only a few people can run. It doesn’t help anybody, and only wastes resources and money.

[magellan01]

@DrCube

Check their passport and ask the home country?

I’m not saying there should be no paperwork at all to get here. At the least we need to know who’s entering the country. I just don’t think citizenship should be a decade long gauntlet that only a few people can run. It doesn’t help anybody, and only wastes resources and money.

Okay, so we need paperwork to be done before we let someone in. Good. But wouldn’t that require an immigration services organization and control of the borders, by a Border Patrol? Two things you categorized as a headache and a money pit. I agree with you that the process should be made easier. But it is up to the host country to determine how many people they’d like to let in and under what conditions. Do you agree?

[foolsguinea]

Most Americans have no idea of the degree to which the USA has abused Latin America since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. T.R. used to be a great hero of mine, but then I came to understand what his foreign policy was & did, & he’s fallen very far in my eyes.

@Lemur866

Bullshit. Honest government might be against the interests of a few oligarchs, but “business” as a group needs honest government to work. With dishonest government you have one business that pays the bribes and competitors are kept out. Sure, that one business has no interest in honest government, but every other business in existance does.

What about a rich, large, powerful country, all the businessmen of which benefit from that corruption, while the hardest hit are disorganized, disenfranchised poor in another country poorer overall? What does that do to your model?

Of course corruption happens all the time, & is encouraged by those whom it benefits, throughout history. We hate to believe the USA does it, but the history of Latin America tells us that it does, & has, one way or another, for a century.

And now the common people of America are horrified by the massive migrations of desperate people from countries wrecked by our rulers: ours & theirs.

[foolsguinea]

And building a wall won’t do jack. This is an economic imperialism problem, but people that don’t know & wouldn’t believe that it is a problem have convinced themselves that it can be solved with carpentry. When the fence fails, they will turn to guns. And that will fail too.

Mexican immigrants don’t need amnesty, they need an apology. And NAFTA needs to be renegotiated. If the relative strength of the US prevents Mexico from getting a fair shake, Mexico will have to just opt out. But with the corruption of its ruling class (which just stole an election), the path for reformers risks quasi-Marxist revolution & war with the US. Mexicans know this; most Americans not only have no idea, they don’t have the education to understand why. Most Americans think Marxism is something about refusing traditional religion & abolishing private property. We just don’t get it.

[BrainGlutton]

@foolsguinea

Mexican immigrants don’t need amnesty, they need an apology.

For what?

@foolsguinea

And NAFTA needs to be renegotiated.

What terms would be better for Mexicans than the current terms?

@foolsguinea

But with the corruption of its ruling class (which just stole an election), the path for reformers risks quasi-Marxist revolution & war with the US.

Why would revolution in Mexico necessarily lead to war with the U.S.?

@foolsguinea

Mexicans know this; most Americans not only have no idea, they don’t have the education to understand why. Most Americans think Marxism is something about refusing traditional religion & abolishing private property. We just don’t get it.

OK, so what do you think Marxism is about (in a Latin American context)? Something like Castro’s revolution in Cuba? Or something like Chavez’ “Bolivarian Revolution” in Venezuela? Or something else entirely?

[Lemur866]

So all American businessmen benefit from corruption in Mexico?

How’s that again? Businessmen who make corrupt deals in Mexico benefit from corruption. Their competitors, customers, and employees suffer from corruption. The people who suffer from corruption in Mexico aren’t just Mexican workers, but also most Mexican businessmen, and almost all American workers and most American businessmen. Corruption by definition enriches a few at the expense of the many.

[BrainGlutton]

BTW, I’ve never been clear on exactly what the Zapatista rebels in Chiapas have as an end-goal. They don’t call themselves Marxists or Communists . . . I don’t think they want to secede from Mexico . . .

[magellan01]

@foolsguinea

And building a wall won’t do jack. This is an economic imperialism problem, but people that don’t know & wouldn’t believe that it is a problem have convinced themselves that it can be solved with carpentry. When the fence fails, they will turn to guns. And that will fail too.

By why will the fence necessarily fail?

@foolsguinea

Mexican immigrants don’t need amnesty, they need an apology.

For what and from whom?

[DrCube]

@magellan01

Okay, so we need paperwork to be done before we let someone in. Good. But wouldn’t that require an immigration services organization and control of the borders, by a Border Patrol? Two things you categorized as a headache and a money pit. I agree with you that the process should be made easier. But it is up to the host country to determine how many people they’d like to let in and under what conditions. Do you agree?

Depends.

I certainly agree that the process should be made easier.
I also agree that it is up to us to decide who we want and under what conditions; I’m just saying that we should let anybody in under any condition except being wanted in another country for a felony, but of course it is our decision. I’m just advocating a different decision to be made.
No, I don’t agree that paperwork necessitates border patrol, or anything but a couple of buildings at points of entry to process said paperwork. I don’t think we need anything like the vast bureaucracy we have now. If people are fleeing the law in another country and are suspected to be heading here, treat it like we treat bi-state police searches. Fax a picture over and we’ll look for the guy.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@DrCube

How about relieving the giant headache/money pit which is immigration services and border patrol, and greatly increasing the pool of able-bodied workers in the U.S.? Isn’t labor (and don’t forget entrepreneurship) a resource, just like capital and land?

I for one can’t see anything to gain by continuing to waste money on keeping harmless and helpful people out of the U.S.
Why don’t we just let them become American people? And then we can help them, and both our countries in the process?

Because the untrammeled influx of cheap labor is not an unmixed good. It helps the laborers themselves, and those who hire them. How did these jobs get done before and why do we need to add a million plus to the population every year to get these things done now? What of the laborers already here, both immigrant and native, who find their wages depressed by the ongoing influx of more? As for the population growth represented by this influx, does it help in any way regarding issues such as transportation and traffic, public school conditions, ER conditions, or pollution? I contend that it does not.

[foolsguinea]

DrCube has it right. But I fear his rational, reasonable proposal will be seen as politically nonviable in the climate of xenophobia stoked by the ignorant.

Mexican immigrants don’t need amnesty, they need an apology.

For what and from whom?

I myself just learned about the problems NAFTA is causing for farmers in Mexico. Immigrants who are fleeing serious hardship are being characterized as opportunists & criminals in much of the US. They’ve been treated as lower than criminals by American society. We shouldn’t say, “Oh, you did wrong, but we’ll let it slide.” That’s what amnesty would be. Rather, we, by which I mean America, (by which I mean* me, you, your congressman, your senator, your local & state government, your police forces, the border patrol, the President, Bob Dole, Bill Clinton, the media, the pundits, the Fortune 500, Michael Jordan, Stan Lee, Beyoncé Knowles, Prince, the NFL, Major League Baseball, Jack Chick, & Patrick J. Buchanan,* but mostly the government) should acknowledge what our country has done wrong to these people &* to their countries*, repent, & stop abusing people for reacting to trouble our Congress caused.

As for new NAFTA terms, why should it be my place (based on my three hours of macroeconomics, whoo!) to devise the process to fix it? Fix it so farmers aren’t uprooted from their own land, Jack! It’s the Mexican gov’t’s job to defend its own people & country. It’s also good for the US not to be a giant dick to the rest of the Westerm Hemisphere.

Why would revolution in Mexico necessarily lead to war with the U.S.?

I didn’t say “necessarily,” I said that was a risk. But a Marxist revolution will lead to war. Maybe a “civil war” where “conservatives” “supported by” the US terrorize the Mexican peasantry, but a bloody war for Mexico all the same. The same reason that revolution in El Salvador & Nicaragua led to war with the US. (That all the blood spilled in those wars was on their soil doesn’t make it any better for those countries or any less war; if those by that standard weren’t US wars, neither is Iraq.) The same reason that American “conservatives” want to assassinate Hugo Chavez. It’s not strictly necessary, but it will happen, because the American neoliberal establishment wants Latin America to be a politically weak region that can be exploited for the wealth of American interests.

OK, so what do you think Marxism is about (in a Latin American context)? Something like Castro’s revolution in Cuba? Or something like Chavez’ “Bolivarian Revolution” in Venezuela? Or something else entirely?

:rolleyes: What it’s almost always about. Someone tells the serfs that the armed struggle will free them. The propaganda works (& revolution happens) when it works because the serfs are truly suffering; thus all large-scale Marxist enterprises have an element of truth in motivation. Unfortunately, the destabilization allows new despots to take power. Castro/Guevara were a little different; they were operating in a world where the USSR was a potential benefactor, so cynical “Leninism” was a useful possibility. Chavez is more a post-Marxist nationalist with strong despotic features. Note that I think that total armed revolution tends to break down & make society worse. Where possible, I favor less radical labor union movements.

By why will the fence necessarily fail?

:eek: The. Gulf. of. Mexico. For one. How unthinking do you have to be to think a fence would work?

[foolsguinea]

@Spectre of Pithecanthropus

Because the untrammeled influx of cheap labor is not an unmixed good. It helps the laborers themselves, and those who hire them. How did these jobs get done before and why do we need to add a million plus to the population every year to get these things done now? What of the laborers already here, both immigrant and native, who find their wages depressed by the ongoing influx of more? As for the population growth represented by this influx, does it help in any way regarding issues such as transportation and traffic, public school conditions, ER conditions, or pollution? I contend that it does not.

You make a good point, to a point. It’s a little simplistic when it comes to the US economy, since so much technical work from around the world is outsourced to the USA. The thing is, immigrants come here because it makes sense for them, & this is due to the economic climate. If the climate changes, so will the migration pattern. Renegotiating NAFTA, to treat a source of the problem (which is really poverty rather than immigration in itself) will do more good than all the “toughen the border” measures being proposed.

Some environmental restrictions on industry, housing, & ulitmately population are necessary, absolutely. But we don’t have local population restrictions for American workers in America* now*. The ecological & economic effects of business need to be better regulated, but the citizenship of our workers is incidental to that, if not irrelevant.

[Lemur866]

So we should apologize because Mexican politicians signed NAFTA?