Thanks for Commenting
>>I have a huge problem with illegal immigration...the fact remains that people who are here illegally are breaking the law, and if you're caught breaking the law there are consequences.
The above statement is probably supported by 300M other Americans. It seems like the crux issue is how to deal with the employers that, on face value, should be accountable and equally penalized.
I'd like to know your thoughts or position on how we might resolve this as it seems like it's really the elemental root of frustration/suspicion and an indication of the divisiveness yet to come.
There are two factors creating a huge surge in people crossing over from Mexico in particular. One is the fact that the allowed immigration numbers are so low compared to the number of unskilled labor jobs that aren't being filled by Americans. Thus, employers turn to hiring illegals. I belive the number is 5000 per year from Mexico, which is almost laughable.
The second factor is the horrible effects of NAFTA, which has displaced many rural farmers and laborers. Look at when NAFTA took effect and then look at the skyrocketing poverty that pushes people to ignore laws in order to feed their families. When you allow massive amounts of subsized corn from the US to inundate the Mexican market and make it untenable for local farmers to compete, you create the situation you see now, just for one example.
You can't blame NAFTA for the immigraton issue at hand. The problem is the Mexican government. No transparcy, no openness, corruption just like the state of New Mexico Insurance department.
But truly, the problem is the slow growth of the Mexican Economy. Free it up and the people would like to stay.
Um John, I suggest you go track the rise in illegal immigration with the growing effects of NAFTA. It's well documented. When you have the price of tortillas jumping a few hundred percent at a time, guess what...people will try to keep eating by going elsewhere.
If you want to see corruption, look inside the global corporations and banks. It puts any other corruption to shame. Really. It starves people all over the planet and wants to starve more.
Um barb, the first wave of border jumping scumbags that got amnesty under Reagan happened before NAFTA. Their numbers were about the same as today's numbers. After that amnesty, Mexicans took it as a green light to invade. The only time the numbers of these foreign criminals have dropped was during the security crackdown post 9-11.
Typical lib argument that it's America and NAFTA's fault for illegals. The fault lies squarely with the Mexican government. That country has the resources to be a decent place to live and work. Mexico's corruption and backwardness doom it to turd world status.
Blaming illegals on corn subsidies is horseshit. Blaming banks and corporations is just as nonsensical. People that spout these lines are usually socialists or communists.
Mexico and Mexicans are the reason for illegals and the poor state of their country. It's not our job to fix it.
Kick out all of these border jumping scumbags, make it a felony to come here illegally and build the wall.
If you're not sickened by an invading army of foreign criminals waving Mexican flags in our cities, you don't deserve to call yourself an American.
Um Barb, have to go with Chris on this one. Business can be corrupt but usually the market catches up with them and they fail. Look at Enron. Government can be corrupt and they usually don't go out of business because they control the means of production and the police/miltary. The Mexican government needs to clean up their act.
Um Chris, the number of immigrants granted amnesty back in the Reagan era was about 3 million. We now have anywhere from 11 to 20 million "illegals."
And if you can't admit the devastating human effects that "free" trade policies and global banking concerns are having, you have a problem interpreting facts.
It isn't "socialist" or "communist" to notice that poorly governed trade, labor practices and lending policies are creating a situation that puts more money in the hands of a few and creates massive poverty while destroying the middle class in many nations. To get there, all you really have to do is be honest with yourself when you look at the facts. I know that's hard to do for starry eyed market worshippers, but you should try it sometime.
Um Barb, the problem with free trade is there is not enough of it. Take India for example, they voted out a free trade government because the impact of free trade on the economy was not reaching enough of the population.
Yes, free trade has been disruptive on the Indian economy but consider the alternative; Slow growth, poor infrastructure, socialist planned economy. Free Trade impacts all, hurts some but benefits more than it hurts.
Barb, are you a member of Aztlan?
I heard one of their members spouting your nonsense verbatim the other night on TV. Right down to the corn and world banks spew.
For those that don't know, Aztlan is a marxist-leninist group that wants to reclaim the Southern United States for Mexicans.
Uh Chris, anyone who calls other human beings who want to eat and care for their families "scumbags" has forfeited any right to be taken seriously. Period.
As to John's free trade comments, you create a false dichotomy between unfair trade and no trade. There are many shades of grey and the devil, as always, is in the details. To ensure that fair trade occurs, there have to be guiding principles that translate into legal requirements. Otherwise, the only ones who win in the deal are rich elites.
Barb, I create no such dichotomy between unfair trade and no trade. Trade is defined as an agreement that one enters into freely and is better off for it. Free Trade is fair trade, problems come up when a government creates incentitives, tariffs or programs to help in the transitition between "trade" and "free trade". Once again, individuals and institutions, get hurt and helped by trade but overall the economy and therefore society is better off.
If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you...in the middle of the desert. There is no such thing as "the economy" that shouldn't also include the needs of human beings for fair labor laws, environmental wisdom and value for their unique local traditions. It's not just some abstraction.
What's best for the "economy" is what's best for the majority of real human beings, not just the investment "community." If you haven't noticed the local upheavals, suffering and cultural destruction that has accompanied so-called "free" trade, you're not looking. Positive and fair trade has always been accompanied by rules, as has anything and everything else of value. If there are no rules, all you have is chaos and bullies taking unfair advantage without any sense of moral compass.
Barb, I have seen the business plan on the bridge, the numbers don't work.
What we have is a different in outlook on people. With free trade, i see 80 people that are better off and celebrate that. You see 20 people that are worse off and wonder what is wrong with the system.
The numbers work.
I think you have your numbers backward. Have you checked out the mounting poverty wherever "free" trade rules?
Commenting by HaloScan
