Lax immigration laws harm US citizens

These are some quotes from a short letter to Foreign Affairs magazine written by Bernard K. Gordon, Professor of Politics Emeritus at the University of New Hampshire:

"The United States does not lack unskilled laborers. U.S. census data report that 72 percent of black high school dropouts were without jobs in 2004, up from about 66 percent in 2000. The link between immigration and high unemployment among young black men is now well established. For almost all other groups, the impact of immigration on jobs and the overall economy is either beneficial or a wash. But as research at Columbia, Georgetown, Harvard, Princeton, and the University of California has shown, recent immigrants with low skills, little education, and little or no English-language capacity worsen the job prospects of young black men who also have little schooling and few skills."

"None of this argues against the genuine, and annually recurring, labor needs of the United States' western and southwestern farms and ranches. That work clearly depends on transient labor, and residents of the United States' urban areas are not going to fill that need. But all those other jobs Jacoby identified, especially those in construction that require targeted skills and training, could be filled by young black men who today are jobless."

"The issue is one of priorities: To whom do we have the greater responsibility, to those hoping for citizenship or to those born in the United States?"

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070501faletters86369/bernard-k-gordon/immigration-and-jobs.html

There are ways of getting around helping unskilled Americans or immigrants at the expense of each other, but that option hasn't been put on the table. Currently, you have the choice of either letting more immigrants in to depress wages; or to let poor Americans have a chance at these jobs.

especially considering that these people will never stop coming here.

As I said in another thread this morning, for a country that was founded on a genocide and built on the backs of slaves, this talk of invasion and depressing wages is pretty nauseating.

Beware of people who try to pit you against your natural allies.

However if you are one of the millions of Americans that have had their wages cut or jobs lost because of someone that has no right to be in the country has taken your job, then you might be a little pissed about it.

However if you are one of the unskilled Americans living in poverty that have been screwed over by this ongoing boondoggle for big business, odds are you may not have a computer so that you can articulate it on DU or any other message forum.

Instead of all this concern and compassion for ID fraud and illegal immigrants, let's have some concern for those who entered the country legally or losing their jobs and let's nail the employers that are getting rich over it.

I tend to agree with Bernie Sanders and Jim Webb that employers need held accountable.

by the virulent anti-labor policy of our government?

:wtf:

And blaming workers for policy seems like a solution to you?

:wtf:

Tell your government's multinational paymasters to keep their claws off of Latin America and see what happens.

Geezus.

I don't give a pass to those who paid several thousand dollars for illegal identity fraud documents and to be taken crossed our borders illegally. Nor do I give a pass to the rich connected business interests who are gladly selling our country down the river for cheap labor and more profits. They've done it in China, India and even convinced Democrats to sign free trade agreements like NAFTA, and it won't surprise me if our new Congress won't give Bush his fast track trade authorization.

to keep Latin America in chaos so they can control labor there and here. (Latin America is fighting back lately and BushCo hates that.)

Focusing on undocumented workers here is like being angry at the fly and not the @sshole holding the swatter. And also like not recognizing that most of us are subject to the same swatter while they set us against each other in every way they can.

It won't help us. It won't solve this problem. Hands off Latin American would solve this much more quickly than any wall we could build. The people there want to stay home and they want democracy. US policy keeps messing with that to satisfy Wall Street, as we lately saw in Mexico.

No one wants to leave their home to work for slave wages and to suffer daily danger and racism.:shrug:

/oops

I agree that the capitalist elite have run amuck because they can. To oversimplify there are no more unions with clout and to that we can thank both Reagan and corrupt union leaders. Also we have Wal*Mart (the ultimate multi-national) as the largest corporation in America that hurts America more than it helps. They are symptomatic of our corrupt K street run government that is beholden to the corporatists, and even on the Democratic side.

Based upon standard purchasing practices (three or more vendors required to prevent collusion), I'm beginning to believe we need multi-parties (more than 2) that must work together to form coalitions based upon their party plank and the voters interests to get elected and to accomplish work for the people. Today we have a simple see-saw.

All that said doesn't mean that illegal immigrants themselves should get a pass and welcomed as saviors of our country or as immigrants looking for a better life. They are law breakers first and moneymakers for the rich second, and they need to vote at home in Mexico so they get a government that works to their benefit.

to make sure the people's choice wouldn't be seated and to make sure the BFEE collaborator would be seated.

And, I generally give a pass to people who are simply trying to survive despite my government's predatory policies and practices. :shrug:

None of this is easy.

The last time the illegals didn't vote (because they were in the USA at the time illegally) the candidate that should have won...lost.

I relate the current elite Mexican government to a Bush run government in the USA that encourges all Democrats to immigrate illegally to Canada. Bush says.....go north young man!

And sure, the BFEE love to see these people coming up here -- with no recourse to the law.

It would just be a good thing to recognize who our real natural allies are.

Unless you are a CEO or have an office on K street.

:)

So, who do you think the candidates would rather please, the people who have the money, or the poor slobs who might or might not vote and even if they do vote, they can be easily influenced by a few well-placed ads or maybe some repeated misinformation from a shock-jock? And even if they vote the wrong way in sufficient numbers, they can manipulate the software to "correct" the vote tallies, or distribute the voting machines in a way that favors people who do vote "correctly".

Do I sound cynical? I guess that's because I am. I KNOW there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans, and I am actually pretty middle of the road, at least imo, but it seems to me a fair amount of candidates, from both sides of the aisle, are in bed with these multinationals. I think Biden is right, the only way to end this is to have publicly funded elections. Like that would ever happen, and even if it did, they'd probably just find another loophole.

if we stop offering them jobs that Americans won't take due to the low wages offered.

Employer prosecution would greatly alleviate, if not completely solve the problem. Unfortunately, it's never really been tried. The legislation is there, and has been there for years. But the will to enforce employers sanctions has never been there. And that's because enforcing the law would increase labor costs, since Americans would have to be employed, forcing employers to pay higher wages. Enforcing sanctions alone would greatly reduce illegal immigration.

A reasonable 1st step is to enforce current law, before passing more laws that we won't enforce.

wages stagnate and others don't get trained!

the elites need a scapegoat.

of how these three industries are impacted and how and by whom. The last time I worked in construction was last year and actually, the project is ongoing.

But, if you need to vilify working people including me, go for it. I won't stand in your way.

And you are WAY wrong. It isn't the immigrants that move here seeking citizenship that are the problem. They are ok, because they have to pay the same bills I do. House payment, car/truck payment, school for kids all that good stuff involved in supporting a family here in America. They can't afford to work for less than me. Fair competition. It keeps everybody honest.

The problem are the TRANSIENT workers. 10-12 in a 1 bedroom apt. Their family back home while they work here for slave wages. They ARE able to undercut Americans and drive down wages. And they have. Construction wages have plummeted here. Safety is terrible, these guys are "disposable". Construction quality has fallen to new lows. All because somebody is willing to do it for less. The developers here are wise to the whole deal and you can't even bid for a job at a decent rate. They'll laugh you out of their office. It's become institutionalized. So, I don't know what kind of project you worked where you are, but if you were here, you'd be making $10 - 15/hr when you should be making $18 - 24/hr. That's the deal.

Because you're an american?

And I have equal responsibility to people, no matter who I am employed by. Doesn't matter where they were born. I guess you think people should have a chart ranking humanity by their origin of birth?

or is citizenship an arbitrary anachronism?

I guess we have to agree to disagree. I consider myself to have a primary obligation to those who employ me rather than their competitors.

to 'learn' the construction trade? How much effort has ever been put into training Americans? I agree with this quote: "None of this argues against the genuine, and annually recurring, labor needs of the United States' western and southwestern farms and ranches. That work clearly depends on transient labor, and residents of the United States' urban areas are not going to fill that need. But all those other jobs Jacoby identified, especially those in construction that require targeted skills and training, could be filled by young black men who today are jobless."


You will never convince young, black or white men, raised in cities, to accept transient jobs throughout the west and southwest. Nor will you see them flocking to the farms of the midwest to bale hay or cut silage or milk cows. But compare how many 'federal dollars' goes into trading and educating the poor to how much we can 'blow' on Iraq and our constantly growing military.

if a contractor can import labor and pay 'em less.

I find it ironic that I'm lectured on xenophobia and racism whenever my advocacy for american workers comes up, while a stereotype such as "You will never convince young, black or white men, raised in cities, to accept transient jobs throughout the west and southwest." passes uncommented.

I think that inner city people are willing to work if given the opportunity, but that's just me I guess.

Isn't that a better answer? Our focus should be on seeing that our native born poor receive a quality education and a path to success.

People don't work because they're educated. They work because there are things to do.

All the education in the world won't help if government imports cheaper labor and businesses outsource the jobs.

a citizen.

The process is so frought with complexity, stupidity, and red tape that even INS workers apologize to those struggling to become citizens.

In answer to the question--BOTH.

A naturalized citizen can vote. Republicans can't have that.

jobs are - there is nothing to stop interstate migration for Americans.

The market really shows it - the employer would hire the American rather than undertake the expense of immigration procedures or running the risk of being caught employing the illegal alien, with the attendant fines (though that is known not to be much enforced.)

In fact one of the few cases involving this provision is where the NLRB ordered an employer to hire back some guys they fired, and the employer in question, having violated the labor laws, could not take his penalty, saying "I can't hire them back, because they're illegals." Don't know if he was subsequently fined for that - having hired them in the first place.

No, we let them in to have a work force without rights - they have to work for less than minimum wage and can't unionize and can't demand good treatment of any kinds. The wall or the border is just a challenge to prove able-bodied status.

There is really no sensible way around this, except to give each entrant a visa so that he/she can compete on equal terms. If they are taking the jobs from Americans, then it's because they not only can but do undercut them on the price. If they can ask the same price for their labor, they won't have that over the citizens (if they truly did exist).

Or the employer just moves the factory abroad, if that is possible. There there is no way to "seal the border" and insulate ourselves from international competition. Even if we could succeed in doing that, the capitalist just goes elsewhere. For the capitalist it's the profit. We can tell the capitalist he ought to stay here and invest here, but we can hardly make laws demanding it.

... why not now?

And why should our government promote policies which turn us into migrant workers who by law, are required to work for more than our competition?

American workers and illegal foreign labor are not working on equal terms. When they send their pay back home, what is considered meager here is able to purchase a good standard of living, and if they break the law here, they can always go home to avoid justice.

We get more and more illegals all the time. Even the 1986 provisions supposedly punishing employers who hired illegals didn't work, we just got more illegals, and even more in proportion. Besides, our very existence as a nation is based on immigration.

Besides, you have to move where the jobs are. Just reality. Not as migrant workers necessarily, but you have to move to where the work is, as for example, the Irish immmigrants did in the 19th century. They couldn't stay in Ireland and whine that the government's policies weren't helping them. They moved to America, Australia, etc., to where the action is. That includes over borders and at great risk, when you're talking of modern immigrants, who, is there is no legal category for them, have to deal with being "illegal." Let alone within the U.S. Within the U.S., there's no excuse for not going where the jobs are.

The government's policies have to be based on reality. If we don't get real, we're going to be the ones immigrating. It would be pretty much schadenfreude for the other countries, too. They'll probably have laws that treat us like crap. It would be hard to blame them. But if India is going to be where the capitalist engine is running, because we made it that way all when we had it, it'll be our own fault.

and other methods of eroding workers' standard of living should take a trip to freeperland.

The left stands with American workers. It has for decades. It will continue to do so. Enough with the Hollywood sentimentality. When you get out of the AMC Movie Theaters, there's real life. And most of us have to live it.

The reality is that there is a wide swath of the left which has abandoned advocacy for workers. "Even if immigration hurts workers, it's only among unskilled men."

The truth hurts. The immigration amnesty bill won't pass without a majority of elected democrats on board, and the result of it will be a huge pool of the working poor who can't vote.

Why has a huge swath of the left abandoned their traditional support for American workers?

That would be political suicide. Then the workers will vote for the Right.

That's exactly right. And those needing seasonal workers CAN get Americans to do the job. They just need to pay more and, possibly, need to spend more money advertising for workers. Increasing the pay enough always increases the labor supply. There are 85 million working age Americans who are not employed at present. If you offered them enough money to do these so-called "low-skilled" jobs, there'd be more than enough workers.

There's no labor shortage. There's only a "cheap" labor shortage.

The costs of education, medication and incarceration of illegals and their families is serious money. You can bet your ass that if this passes the feds aren't going to pay these costs but continue to foist them onto the states.

In the building construction industry, what happens is one person has legal paperwork to present to a contractor and becomes the subcontractor, shoes up at the job site with cheap illegal labor, the builders turn their back because of profit.