# Oh silly, of course they didn't mean it that way! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 28, 2005, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385 "2005-12-28T01:32:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2006, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/261 "2006-01-02T06:14:52Z")
> [@Updike](#): > > To be honest, that’s what it seems like to me. > > Has he paid all of his taxes, federal, state, and local? He’s never worked “off the books”? > > Did he register for the draft when he turned 18? > > Does he have a valid driver’s license, and the insurance required in your state? > > (Or did he use his fake social security card to get the license, making it invalid?) > > Has he every been called for jury duty? > > Does he vote? I know that voting is not a legal requirement, but I do consider it a responsibility. > > So yes, I think that people who enjoy the benefits of our society, without paying the commensurate costs, are selfish. Were I to answer this myself, as a person born in this country, two of my answers would still be no. As far as I know I _can’t_ register for the draft since I’m female, and I’ve yet to be called for jury duty. I suppose these things make me selfish too… and I know a few people who aren’t doing their duty of driving, or didn’t begin to do so until well into their 20s, selfish bastards. You have a very strange way of looking at what benefits the country, Updike. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2006, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/262 "2006-01-02T07:00:02Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > You have a very strange way of looking at what benefits the country, Updike. Betcha I can name someone who doesn’t (benefit the country). **Updike**. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![calm\_kiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc348/32.png) [@calm\_kiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/calm_kiwi)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2006, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/263 "2006-01-02T07:32:16Z")
> [@Updike](#): > > Yes, I do. Unless we’re discussing respiration or having a heartbeat, I believe that individuals have a choice in _everything_ we do. In fact, our choices are what define us, and make us human. To say that anyone “didn’t have a choice” is untrue. So you chose to be American? My mother gave birth to me in New Zealand, being a New Zealander wasn’t my choice just a lucky accident of birth…I’m eternally grateful that my mother had a bloody good accident. You and I both come from countries where we get to make choice. The fact that you disbelieve that there are people who never have choice in their lives shows your ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Cardinal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardinal/32/4000_2.png) [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2006, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/264 "2006-01-02T13:34:54Z")
As what I hope is a final little aside, I just want to officially disassociate myself from Updike. Even if he has a few valid points (and I’m not sure about that), he’s making them in a manner guaranteed to make people mad. Seriously, Updike, do you listen to Limbaugh and think that he’s the archetype of conservative thought and interaction? I even (maybe I can take a tiiiiny piece of credit) had this thread on an even keel, and you came back to just wack it in the head with a bat. Do you get off on this? ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/265 "2006-01-03T15:42:47Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I first read that as saying that \*\*Weirddave \*\*and \*\*Shayna \*\*were married. Now, that would be weird!! Sweet Jesus! I’d rather have my testicles sliced up by a sushi chef and served to the masses Edomae style. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/266 "2006-01-03T16:37:42Z")
> [@dangermom](#): > > I didn’t say it, but I will say that the comparison to slavery may be because we here in the USA, by tolerating this illegal immigration thingy, have got ourselves a nice little underclass. An underclass that will do jobs we won’t do for so little money, because we aren’t desperate enough. Lovely, ain’t it? Perhaps it’s better compared to sharecropping, but it isn’t pretty either way. > > Personally, I would rather see immigration enforcement tightened up, properly administered, and immigration itself opened up. Then perhaps the workers could earn a decent wage legally instead of almost nothing illegally. Yes, we would have to pay more for produce, but I’d rather have pricier lettuce than a permanent underclass in my society. Plenty of American citizens will do the labor if they can earn something resembling an actual wage from it–the argument that “they’re doing jobs we won’t do anyway” only holds as long as the wages are so criminally low. Fallacy one- that we get significantly cheaper produce because of illegal immigrants. Farmers do save quite a bit on labor by hiring _braceros_, but that term means “migrant farm worker” and not “illegal immigrant”. Many braceros are “legal”. Please provide a **cite** that we pay less for produce because of illegal immigrants. Fallacy two- that “illegals” get paid less than “legals”. I worked extensively with Farm Laborers here in CA. Other than a few extremelyrare highly publicized cases of nigh chattel slavery, “undocumented aliens” are paid exactly the same as “greencarded migrant farm workers”. Both are generally hired by Farm-labor contractors or the farm itself. Many have Union representation. Now- let me make this perfectly clear- **no farmer or farm labor cont** ractor (with anything to lose) **will pay “illegals” less than “legals”** And there’s an excelent reason for this- they all pretend all their workers are legal, so that if the INS makes a sweep, the employers won’t get arrested too. If you can put on a good act and say "We didn’t know they were illegal! :eek: " as an employer you often are safe from penalties and arrest. But if you were paying "illegals’ 1/2 that of legals- then you are shit out of luck, and you’re going to jail. Thus, just about all farmers & FLC pay all their workers the same- _which is not very much, sure_. (“Same” is often based upon amount harvested, so experience helps, of course).You’d have to be an idiot to pay an illegal less- thus showing you _know_ they are illegal. So- **cite** that illegals are _commonly_ paid less than legals? (not less than “the average wage”- farm workers- even those white and born here are paid rather poorly for very hard work, sure. But “illegals” aren’t paid significantly less). Now- don’t get me wrong- illegal immigration _is wrong_. There are those who prey on the illegals wanting to cross, and some who prey on them here. Some “illegals” die trying to cross the desert. Social Services here are already overburdened, so extra population growth is problematic. I suggest a strong "guest worker’ program for Mexico and Canada. This would allow just about anyone to enter _for the purpose of work_. They would not be eligable for most social services. They wouldn’t be able to bring their families. It could be possible for a contract/treaty to be signed saying that any child born of a “guest worker” is considered only a citizen of the parents nationality. Combine this with a much stronger "fence’ along the Mexican border. If the braceros could enter at any time to get work, then go back home also at any tiem to be with their families, this would end most of the problems right then & there. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/267 "2006-01-03T17:20:59Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Fallacy one- that we get significantly cheaper produce because of illegal immigrants. Farmers do save quite a bit on labor by hiring _braceros_, but that term means “migrant farm worker” and not “illegal immigrant”. Many braceros are “legal”. Please provide a **cite** that we pay less for produce because of illegal immigrants. > > Fallacy two- that “illegals” get paid less than “legals”. I worked extensively with Farm Laborers here in CA. Other than a few extremelyrare highly publicized cases of nigh chattel slavery, “undocumented aliens” are paid exactly the same as “greencarded migrant farm workers”. Both are generally hired by Farm-labor contractors or the farm itself. Many have Union representation. Now- let me make this perfectly clear- **no farmer or farm labor cont** ractor (with anything to lose) **will pay “illegals” less than “legals”** And there’s an excelent reason for this- they all pretend all their workers are legal, so that if the INS makes a sweep, the employers won’t get arrested too. If you can put on a good act and say "We didn’t know they were illegal! :eek: " as an employer you often are safe from penalties and arrest. But if you were paying "illegals’ 1/2 that of legals- then you are shit out of luck, and you’re going to jail. Thus, just about all farmers & FLC pay all their workers the same- _which is not very much, sure_. (“Same” is often based upon amount harvested, so experience helps, of course).You’d have to be an idiot to pay an illegal less- thus showing you _know_ they are illegal. So- **cite** that illegals are _commonly_ paid less than legals? (not less than “the average wage”- farm workers- even those white and born here are paid rather poorly for very hard work, sure. But “illegals” aren’t paid significantly less). > > Now- don’t get me wrong- illegal immigration _is wrong_. There are those who prey on the illegals wanting to cross, and some who prey on them here. Some “illegals” die trying to cross the desert. Social Services here are already overburdened, so extra population growth is problematic. > > I suggest a strong "guest worker’ program for Mexico and Canada. This would allow just about anyone to enter _for the purpose of work_. They would not be eligable for most social services. They wouldn’t be able to bring their families. It could be possible for a contract/treaty to be signed saying that any child born of a “guest worker” is considered only a citizen of the parents nationality. Combine this with a much stronger "fence’ along the Mexican border. If the braceros could enter at any time to get work, then go back home also at any tiem to be with their families, this would end most of the problems right then & there. [http://www.ufw.org/nythsg.htm](http://www.ufw.org/nythsg.htm) This was incredibly easy to find. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/268 "2006-01-03T17:41:17Z")
The effect of stemming the flow of illegal aliens working on farms will increase prices but would not, as many farm owners are saying, drive farms out of business nor result in 5 dollar a head of lettuce: [A 1996 study by an Iowa State agricultural economist concluded that “The removal of illegal workers from the seasonal agricultural workforce would increase the summer-fall supermarket prices of fresh fruits and vegetables by about 6 percent in the short run and 3 percent in the intermediate term.”](http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters91bf) Now, what this has to do with literally alienating American citizens, I do not know. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/269 "2006-01-03T18:14:52Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > [http://www.ufw.org/nythsg.htm](http://www.ufw.org/nythsg.htm) > > This was incredibly easy to find. But it doesn’t answer either of my requests for cites. Where does it show that _illegals \* get paid significantly less than legal braceros? It does show that braceros (both illegal and legal) often get paid poorly and far too often live in substandard housing (and one reason for that is because most braceros don’t spend their money here, they send it home- thus they choose to live in substandard conditions_- which aren’t all that “substandard” compared to the conditions for the a good number of the poor in Mexico). In fact, your cite even claims that of those braceros, only 40% are here illegaly- which means that _60% are here legally_. Next- where does that cite claim that our produce prices are _signficantly_ less due to ILLEGAL migrant farm workers? **Biggirl** s excellent cite shows a very reasonable estimate of 3-6%, which I think sounds about right. Now, without ANY bracero labor those prices _could_ be signficantly higher. In Salinas & Watsonville CA, where I worked with these people, I never saw conditions that bad. I did see young men staying 8+ to a cheap motel room, eating very cheaply, and sending every dime they could “back home”. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/270 "2006-01-03T19:12:50Z")
> [@Cardinal](#): > > (Notice that I’m actually reading people’s posts and responding to their points, and not calling them names to discredit them) I know, and I’m terribly disappointed in you. Where do you think you are, anyway? > [@](#): > > There are a couple problems with what you said. I didn’t say that we grab every kid who is living here now who was born to illegal immigrants and throw them out. But we have to decide which discussion we’re having. Are we talking about whether the rule really makes sense for the future, or just the best method to implement it? I got the feeling before that it was beyond questioning for many on the other side. Are you saying that it’s not for you? My real point is that if we can decide that it doesn’t make sense for the future, then we can cross a mental line and work on how best to do it. Well, obviously the current way of doing things makes sense to me, otherwise I wouldn’t be disagreeing with you in just about every possible way, except as regards the utility of **Updike** ’s posts in this thread. Personally, I think the concern about illegal immigration is way overblown - which, I think, was the point of posts mentioning historical attitudes towards the Irish/Italians/Jews/whoever the immigrant _du jour_ was. Not to say that you’re a racist for worrying about Mexican immigrants, but to point out that people have been claiming that immigrants are damaging the country for centuries, and that such claims are usually unfounded. I feel the same way about current concerns - that there’s really very little substance to them, and that efforts to address the problem only create larger, more dire problems. Canceling citizenship for children born in this country is a prime example of a (forgive me) really stupid idea that does nothing to address a problem of questionable importance to begin with. People aren’t coming to this country just for citizenship itself: they already had that in their home countries. They’re coming here to escape political oppression, seek economic opportunities, and generally make a better life for themselves in a way that’s not possible in their home land. Taking away the possibility of citizenship doesn’t take away their incentive to come here, it just makes it harder for them to ever be anything other than a disadvantaged underclass. > [@](#): > > I also don’t really know exactly why I’m being accused of being heartless, unless once again people have read things I didn’t write. I didn’t write that we should be deporting current citizens. I said the practice doesn’t make a lot of real practical sense, and that I would stop it. I don’t think you’re heartless, I think your idea is, because it will cause significant harm to address essentially a legalistic, largely unimportant complaint. I know you’re not saying that we should strip citizenship from people who already have it; that would take a much more drastic ammendment than the one you’re proposing. But you didn’t answer my original question: say we change the law today, and tomorrow a kid is born here to illegal immigrants. Fifteen years later, he and his parents are busted by Immigration. The kid has lived here his entire life. He’s never been to his “homeland.” Everyone he knows lives here. Maybe he doesn’t even know that he’s not here legally. Should he lose all that, should everything and everyone he knows be taken away from him because of something that his parents did before he was even born? I don’t think that’s morally justifiable. I think it’s entirely without any form of compassion or humanity. Again, I’m not saying _you_ have those traits, but I really don’t think you’ve thought out your position on this, because that’s what the results would be if you got your way. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure what your point is about Texas. It would seem to support my point. Illegal immigration (I’m sure there was a lot of it from America) helped very significantly to overthrow the established government. Even if the writers of the 14th Amendment thought that was just fine, in a selfish sort of way, it would seem to be a cautionary tale against allowing illegal immigration to an extent that it impacts the nature of the beast. The point is two-fold: first, that the authors of that ammendment knew very well the consequences of illegal immigration, which you had suggested might not have been the case at the time it was drafted. But more importantly, that the ammendment was created so as to address that very problem in the most efficient, effective way possible. We can’t stop illegal immigration. Walling off Mexico is impractical, enormously expensive, and will almost certainly be ineffective. These people are going to be here, one way or another. Do we try to assimilate them, or do we do every thing in our power to keep them disaffected and seperate from our society? Giving their children citizenship means they have a stake in the future of the country beyond using it as an opportunity to put food on the table. Taking that away from them seems to me to be the first step on the road to the sort of massive, violent social disconect that led to weeks of widespread rioting in France lately. And seeing as you’re a conservative, I know that last thing you want to see is America becoming more like France. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/271 "2006-01-03T19:27:09Z")
Well, best estimates show that most braceros are illegal (52%) which speaks to your first point. Reducing the workforce by more than half would, I think, improve working conditions for all migrant workers-- firstly by making each of the much more valuable and secondly by drying up the _illegal_ ones, those migrating farmers would have a much louder political voice. By reducing the migrant work force, I think the increase would be much more significant than predicted because, not only would real wages rise (as my cite indicates, real wages have fallen _because_ of the large influx of illegals) but also living conditions would improve dramatically. I think this would be a good debate topic for GD. I don’t hang out over there anymore because I really, really don’t have time to (Good Lord does looking up cites and formulating semi-coherent posts take a looooong time.) However, the legislation being pitted does not speak to this problem at all. But again, I ask: what does that have to do with alienating American citizens? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/272 "2006-01-03T19:38:43Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > Well, best estimates show that most braceros are illegal (52%) which speaks to your first point. Reducing the workforce by more than half would, I think, improve working conditions for all migrant workers-- firstly by making each of the much more valuable and secondly by drying up the _illegal_ ones, those migrating farmers would have a much louder political voice. > However, the legislation being pitted does not speak to this problem at all. > But again, I ask: what does that have to do with alienating American citizens? Your 1st cite claims only 40%, not 52%. But I agree. Reduce the illegal immigrant problem, and things get better for just about everyone- other than the illegals. However- I propose an open number of “guest worker permits”, see above. It does to a small extent- some women cross the border just to have their babies in America. How big the problem is, I dunno. As to this last point- I dunno. Who claims it does? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/273 "2006-01-03T19:47:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > As to this last point- I dunno. Who claims it does? 😕 This is ostensibly what this thread is about, remember? Legislation to ensure certain American citizens aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2006, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385/274 "2006-01-03T20:14:42Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > Do you know what the illegal immigrants do on Long Island? Build houses they can never afford to live in because they make $100 a week, watch “legal” children and clean big, fancy houses. THIS I’ve seen with my very own eyes. The debate can’t be quashed by saying how thankful we should be for the low cost of supermarket lettuce, restaurant meals, or gardeners for hire. Instead we should be considering the long term effects of mass immigration, galloping population growth in the exactly areas that are least able to accommodate that growth with regard to the water supply, and the social and economic implications of importing a growing underclass. The reason your immigrant construction workers earn $100 a week is because so many have come the bottom has dropped out of the labor market. Every country has its laws about immigration. There was a time when I naively thought I could move to Europe one day, blend in, and work for a living, and then I found out how profoundly difficult it is. The country of my paternal ancestry, Holland, does not accept immigrants at all, or did not at the time I made inquiries. I didn’t like that either, but guess what? I abided by it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oh-silly-of-course-they-didnt-mean-it-that-way/337385.md?page=13)