This is obvious. He is willing to do this because cheap labor benefits his supporters disproportionately to society as a whole. And secondarily as a sop to Hispanic groups in an attempt to win votes.
Cheap labor is like free trade - you can certainly make the argument that overall GDP is helped by it, but the facts on the ground show that there are definitely subgroups in America that are greatly harmed by both. And those subgroups that are most harmed are the lowest rung in society, while those that most benefit are the upper and upper middle.
Mexico has a border with Belice and Guatemala. The restricted zone is only a narrow band along borders and coastline. It ism’t clearly aimed at Americans. That is your clearly your subjective opinion. In the rest of the country, over 90% of it’s territory, foreigners can own property. If you are trying to use this as some form of justification for your argument you are way off base. All countries restrict foreigners in one way or another. The US, I believe has restrictions on foriegners owning broadcast media.
US immigration policy has always been guided by racism. Try reading your own history. Exclusionary laws based on race were common. Non-whites have always been easy to turn into scapegoats whenever certain political factions find it convenient.
As far as restrictive immigration policies, can you please enlighten the board to what these restrictions are and who they restrict? You obviously do you have that information to be able to make such a statement.
This is the second time (at least) you’ve made that assertion. This non-WASP American understands the English term always to mean as it was in the past, still is. What proof do you have that the current immigration policy of the government of the United States of America is guided by racism.
And, just for the fun of it, leave out your subjective opinions of the matter. Enlighten us with facts, current facts.
How can there be a legal second language when English hasn’t been accepted as a legal first language? We have no national language. Not legally, anyway.
“Even as the U.S. Department of State is warning travelers away from Haiti and evacuating non-essential embassy personnel, the U.S. government continues to pursue a policy of, as President Bush stated, “turn back any [Haitian] refugee that attempts to reach our shore.” This includes aggressive interdiction at sea with scant investigation of refugees’ need for asylum prior to repatriation, and long detentions followed by cursory hearings and return to Haiti . The treatment of Haitian refugees and immigrants stands in stark contrast to the way that refugees from Cuba , China , and other nations are handled.”
Please tell me John, why then are they singled out for different treatment?
No, because the law says any Cuban who reaches land in the US is automatically granted asylum. Haitian refugees are economic refugees, and Cubans are recognized as politcal refugees. That has nothing to do with race. In fact, many Cubans are Black. If you can show that Black Cubans are systematically treated differently than non-Black Cubans, then you’d have a case.
Yes John and why does the law grant Cubans asylum and not Haitians? By what criteria is this determined?
The reason Cubans are admitted is purely political. The Cubans have a powerful voting block in Florida that protects them. Haitians are bring turned back at sea without having even a chance to apply fo political asylum. Haiti suffers from a far worse political situation than do Cubans. Why does the US refuse to consider them political refugees?
**"Haitians are and have been turned away from the United States in proportions far outnumbering people from other nations despite the fact they are fleeing conditions that should ensure approval of asylum for them:
Long-standing human-rights abuses, which go back many years to the long and harsh rule of the Duvalier family;
The 1991 military coup that overthrew Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the democratically elected president;
Continuing and increasing chances for abuse by police in Haiti where the justice system and government are weak. Civilians do not trust the system to work so resort to vigilante actions.
Ignoring these facts, the United States frequently labels Haitian refugees as economic entrants, a category of refugees that does not merit asylum under U.S. law. That is compounded by a belief that since reinstatement of Mr. Aristide, conditions in Haiti have improved." **
Hey, I’m not saying the law about Cubans is a good law or even a fair law. But it’s purely political and anti-Communist. It has nothing to do with racism.
OK so what about the Haitians? I think it is a general consensus that human rights are nonexistent in Haiti. Bad enough that first US and then UN peacekeepers are there.
Why aren’t Haitians considered political refugees?
St. Brendan!