Let’s say that I have a car. I always lock my car. I’ve never invited people to get into my car. I’ve not put any signs on my car saying anything other than that my car is off limits to others.
Now, I walk out to my car one day, and there’s a dude sitting in the passenger seat. He’s broken in. So I’m like, “Dude, WTF?” And he explains to me, “Senor, I love cars, but I cannot afford one of my own. Can I please ride in yours, and every time we are at a gas station, I will pump the gas for you. When we return to your home, I will wash your car. You don’t have to pay me anything.”
So…
a) Am I exploiting this man if I choose to go along with his offer?
b) Do I not have the right to kick him out?
c) If I have accepted his offer, does my wife have no right to slap me upside the head and make me kick the dude out and report him to the police?
Personally, I would say that I am not exploiting him. It was him who sought it, entirely of his own volition and against my wishes. I have every right to kick him out. And my wife has every right and in fact should slap me on the head if I try to do anything other than report the guy to the police.
I like your flexible use of the words “us” and “we”. Americans who oppose illegal immigration and pass laws regulating immigration are “us”, while Americans (the many, many Americans) who furnish the demand for illegal immigrant labor by employing illegal immigrants are not “us”, they’re “people”.
How about the Americans who contribute to the profitability of American businesses that employ illegal immigrants? Sage Rat, do you always take the trouble to ensure that all the fruits and vegetables you buy were grown and processed without illegal immigrant labor? Do you make sure not to patronize commercial enterprises whose buildings were constructed using illegal immigrant labor?
If you don’t…well in that case, if you want to know who’s exploiting illegal immigrants, just take a look in the mirror.
[QUOTE=Kimstu;11549017Sage Rat, do you always take the trouble to ensure that all the fruits and vegetables you buy were grown and processed without illegal immigrant labor?[/QUOTE]
That’s just a feeble attempt on your part to change the subject. My previous post was completely on-point. You asked for an explanation of how “we” are exploiting illegal immigrant workers, and I pointed out that anybody who facilitates or encourages the employment of illegal immigrant workers is exploiting them, because it’s tempting them to break the law.
And if you contribute to the profits of businesses that employ illegal immigrant workers, you’re encouraging their employment, so you’re part of the exploitation. Simple as that.
Sure. Finding the logical holes in your arguments is not hard. In this case, your illogic consists of refusing to recognize that you are in effect inviting “intruders” to “break into your car”, because you’re rewarding them when they do so by giving them your money. Just because you’re simultaneously shouting “NO! STAY OUT OF MY CAR! (here’s some money) YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED IN MY CAR! (here’s some more money)” doesn’t let you off the hook.
If you don’t want to be part of the exploitation of illegal immigrants, then stop encouraging illegal immigration by paying money to enterprises that profit from the labor of illegal immigrants. Simple as that.
Firstly, tell me again how making me a criminal–a purchaser of illegally manufactured goods–means that I can’t fight illegal activity? Because I’m a criminal, I have no choice to say, “Hey, I don’t want to be a criminal. I’ll vote for you. I’ll pay extra taxes. I’ll pay higher prices at the store. Let’s stop breaking the law.”? How does this logic work exactly?
But to answer your question; no, I’m getting shafted too. I’ve got the options of:
a) Starving to death because the easiest way to make sure that I’m not receiving goods that were manufactured illegally is to abstain from new purchases.
b) Wasting significant quantities of time and money to track down and/or create my own legal products.
c) Get shafted.
I’m sorry to be the person to inform you at this late point in life that reality isn’t made of black and white. Sometimes a person, in the face of threat of death, decides to do something that he’d prefer not to. This, in fact, happens so often that it doesn’t even register as having been something wrong to do. Is it wrong to buy the last balloon, even though possibly the next buyer could have been some 10 year old kid who is going to die of a horrible disease in 24 hours? Yes, it is wrong. If reality allowed me, I would try to make sure that I was the person who could most benefit from a balloon at that particular time in the world. But the unfortunate truth is that I don’t have magical powers. I don’t have a practical way to avoid doing all the things in the world that I would choose not to do if it was feasible.
Addendum, but let’s also look at the word, “exploit” This word implies malfeasance or nefarious intent.
A bunch of people getting together, with good intentions all around, that ends up bad for one or both of them, can’t be exploitation. No nefarious intent = No Exploitation. And this is especially true if, on discovering that someone is getting shafted, one of the parties moves to stop the process. It’s when they don’t seek to stop it that they’re being exploitative.
It doesn’t. But you can’t just close your eyes to the fact that your purchasing support for illegal manufacturing is contributing to the illegal activity you’re trying to fight.
I completely agree with you that because there are so many businesses and individuals that benefit directly or indirectly from illegal immigrant labor, it’s almost impossible for individuals to avoid all involvement with our nation’s system of exploiting illegal immigrants by rewarding them financially when they break our immigration laws.
Consequently, all of us who participate in this commercial system that’s so largely dependent on illegal immigrant labor are participating in the exploitation of illegal immigrants. You don’t get to pretend that you’re not really exploiting anybody, just because you’d rather not be exploiting anybody if you knew how to avoid it.
If we’re part of an exploitative system, we can and should try to change the system, but we’re not entitled to kid ourselves that we’re not really part of it.
This had to do with voting rights, and nothing at all to do about the movement of people across borders. You are moving the goal posts; this was not a discussion of whether immigrants, legal or not, have the same political rights as citizens.
Your point is well taken (and rather humorous, too).
But, my understanding is that the “huddled masses” phrase originates from a time when the United States was a largely unpopulated country seeking new immigrants. Times have changed, and there are no longer as many large swaths of unpopulated land needing residents. Also, the economy has shifted from an agrarian labor-intensive economy towards a more knowledge-based economy. A strong back and a solid work ethic will not get an immigrant as far as it used to. Now, they better know how to program one of them fancy computational device thingies…
It’s not exploitative. I don’t want to encourage people to plunk themselves down on my property and expect goodies. That’s why I’d rather not contribute to it.
To be exploitative we would have had to have initiated the process. We would have had to have promised something that we didn’t give. They broke into our country.
And really, what’s your solution? You want to give them education and health care and everything so long as they continue to work for less than minimum wage? Once you start legalizing and legitimizing illegal labor, that’s when you’re getting exploitative. That’s when you’re saying, “Yeah, we want this. We want you to be here and to do slave labor.”
The only way that Mexicans are going to be able to legally work in a non-exploitative way is if they’re getting paid a proper wage, getting full benefits, and all of it. And amazingly we have just such a process whereby Mexicans can receive that. If you want to raise the number of work visas and green cards to be issued in a year, then lobby for that. But legitimizing anything else, is creating a secondary citizen. It’s saying, yeah we want to take advantage of the situation.
Good god, man, listen to yourself. I have never heard, nor can I even conceive of hearing this kind of venom spit towards Canadian or European immigrants. It’s really really hard for me to rationalize it as anything but racist*. Yeah, I know how aghast you’ll pretend to be at the mere suggestion. Save it. Just think about what you’re saying. Particularly the second quote is one of the most outrageously ignorant things I’ve ever read here. They’re both just distilled hate. You wouldn’t refer to a white guy as “an illegal” no matter what his crime. It’s derogatory slang, pure and simple. It’s the nigger of our day. Everyone stamps their feet until they are red in the face and insists it’s not a race, class, or culture issue, but I know Canadians and Europeans who aren’t supposed to be here and they get nothing but sympathy when they openly talk about their status and how hard it is to become a legit citizen.
I am deeply personally offended by your comments. I know extremely good, salt of the Earth people that you would dismiss as wanted criminals who have no value. That enrages me. My heart literally races at the thought. It’s so hateful I cannot even relate to it. I can’t empathize with your position at all. I can’t understand what’s going on in your head that makes you feel like it’s ok to denigrate an entire group of people like that. As far as I’m concerned, people like you add no value. We should build a fence to keep YOU out.
*It’s actually a little more complicated than that. It involves a clash of hispanic and anglo culture that has been going on since before the United States even existed. It’s probably not solely, and perhaps not even largely, a skin color thing, but I’m currently at a loss for an easily recognizable word that describes this as well as “racist,” and I’m not sure you can’t be racist for reasons unrelated to skin color anyway.
Historically, fixed barrier borders have proved deeply porous. The Libyan wire which the Italians put up in the '30s was soon breached in numerous places. The Inner German Border was crossed numerous times over the years, given enough ingenuity. And that was much shorter and more money and ruthlessness was thrown at policing it than we would ever be prepared to do.
A fence wouldn’t work. He could tunnel under it or fly over it. More likely he’d hire or build something that floats and get across the Gulf of Mexico or whatever. What has the ‘war on drugs’ taught us, if not that increased enforcement only improves the business climate for professional smugglers?
