housing 10 years from now

[JES]

That American citizen should go to school and get advanced skills in areas like engineering, nursing or landscape architecture (if gardening is their passion) so they don’t have to compete with the Mexican gardener. And then they will be able to compete with the Chinese, Indian, Bangledeshi, Pakistani Iranian and European engineers who come to this country, get a few years of experience at the best companies and then take the knowledge back to foreign economies, space programs and militaries in some cases.

Multiculturalism may seem like a noble cause, but it is consistantly backfiring accross the globe and is fundamentaly flawed. Whether we look at Europe’s Muslims or our own experiences here in the U.S., it is clear that we should be finding ways to bring people together and not championing our differences to the point that pride, hatred and intolerance take root.

Go to the suburbs of Paris in the country you know so well and tell me how well multiculturalism is working. Go to the Netherlands and ask them how multiculturalism has led to close to 1 million foreigners who refuse to integrate and are actually trying to impose Muslim cultural laws on everyone.

Read this article from the Washington Post on Europe’s failed multiculturalism:

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20041210-083500-8610r.htm

[PerryChase]

Diego, it's the Republican marketing machine. When things go awry they bash immigrants. Prop 187 and Pete Wilson were products of the 1990's recession.

When Iraq and the economy go south, they'll just deflect and blame the immigrants who can't vote. How convenient.

deadzone, social services are NOT available to illegals (that's just a myth)  Emergency room medical is all that is available.  If you get into an accident in Mexico, yes, they would take care of you in their hospital… and if you can't pay, they can't collect.  

 

[Anonymous]

If you can’t pay, you will go to Jail if you are an illegal alien in Mexico.

[Anonymous]

I consider public schools a social service, I don’t know about the rest of you.

[JES]

The problem I see with us complaining about the social services costs is that the positive impact illegal immigrants have had on the economy far outweighs these costs. It is tough to put a figure on it (perhaps someone has data?), but these 10 million people fill unwanted and low wage jobs that would otherwise go unfilled at a time of almost full employment in this country. They spend some of the hundreds of billions of dollars they earn on consumption. Seems to me that the real issues here are 1) Criminal activity, and 2) The impact that immigration has on our culture. Are small towns in Wisconsin, for example, willing to welcome in masses of Mexican immigrants whose culture differs from their own? And are those immigrants willing to assimilate into our own culture, learn English etc? Too many immigrants too fast can radically change a culture. I say that most Americans will welcome this so long as it is balanced because I am convinced that unlike Muslim immigrants in Europe, Mexican immigrants share many of our values and will want to assimilate over time. In the short run though we will see increased crime, friction in communities and the like.

[Diego Mamani]

Re: Prop 187

When I travelled to Latin America and Europe in the mid 90s I was pretty much ashamed when people asked me about this initiative (people there had read it in the news). It was widely inconceivable to them, and unforgivable too, that someone would be asking children to show documentation before being admitted to a public school.

Immigrants don’t come for the “free public services”. They come here because of the wage differencial; in other words, they come here to WORK. They contribute with their hard work (have you seen any born US citizen lining up for toilet cleaner jobs lately?) and they contribute with the sales taxes they pay in the countless transactions they are involved in, not to mention income tax withheld that they forgo entirely if they are undocumented.

The problem we have is that the laws are not in agreement with the economic reality: there are willing workers south of the border, and willing employers north of it. To pretend that this economic reality can go away by decree is naive, to say the least.

In fact, one of the few sensible initiatives proposed by Bush was his guest worker program; which would regulate, rationalize and institute order in an activity that is impossible to ban by decree.

[rankandfile]

Comon Diego & Perry, surely you can do better than that. Breaking out the race card is a tired, lazy attempt and only says you have no real substance to bring to the argument. Republican propaganda machine? Are you for real? Just because you are on the MoveOn.org email list doesn't mean you have to regurgitate their talking points. Many top ranking Republicans are for illegal immigration or have done nothing of meaning to try to slow or stop it. They are just as bad as the liberals in this regard.

Many conservatives like me don't have a problem with hard-working people that want to come here (legally) to earn a living. And we are not racist, either. But they should do it the right way, and do it legally. Just taking the border doors off their hinges and letting anyone in has several drawbacks:

1. It presents a security breach
2. Not every illegal that comes here is a good person…many of them are criminals as well.
3. They strain our social services such as health care, education, and criminal justice systems. Who do you think pays for them to get treated at the hospital, earn an education, or be given a fair trial?

I got this excerpt from this website. If anyone can verify it's accuracy it would be greatly appreciated.

Here are some statistics from the Los Angeles Times:
40 percent of all workers are working for cash and not paying taxes. Why would they want to be legal and pay taxes? They would be able to start bringing the rest of their families to the USA.
75 percent of people on L.A.'s most-wanted list are illegal aliens.
Over two-thirds of all births are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by the taxpayers.
Nearly 25 percent of all inmates in California detention centers are here illegally.
Over 300,000 illegals are living in garages.
The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegals from south of the border.
Nearly 60 percent of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
Of the 10 million people in Los Angeles County, 5.1 million speak English and 3.9 million speak Spanish.
21 radio stations in Los Angeles are Spanish speaking.
More statistics:
Less than 2 percent of illegals are picking crops but 29 percent are on welfare.
Over 70 percent of the U.S. annual population growth (over 90 percent of California, Florida and New York) are from immigration.
29 percent of inmates in the federal prisons are illegal aliens.
The lifetime fiscal impact (taxes minus services used) for the average adult Mexican immigrant is a negative.
They also send between about $15 billion back to Mexico to assist their families and prop up the corrupt Mexican government that keeps most of its citizens in poverty. How about a revolt in their own country!
A new figure from yesterday: It cost Los Angeles $276 million in welfare costs for 100,000 children of illegal aliens.

[barnaby33]

Hey JES, I liked your call for some statistics. The problem is there really aren’t many. Each side has anecdotal evidence to support its case, neither has hard facts. This stems from the very nature of what is attempting to be studied. An undocumented group of people. People who for the most part, want to remain invisible (by necessity.)

Its very hard to have a discussion about immigration without someone throwing out the race card. I see Diego was first to do it. These threads really aren’t the place for this type of discussion its to heated. Even if this is not in the housing area the anonymity and nature of the topic almost always lead to a flame war.

Josh

[PD]

Diego,
People who are against illegal immigration are not “xenophobic, wannabe klansmen.” Save the slurs for when they really apply, otherwise, they lose all meaning.

What would you think of the following:

If you immigrate to the United States of America, you must speak the native language. You have to be a professional or an investor. We are not going to take unskilled workers. You will not be allowed.*
There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, no government business will be conducted in your native language.
Foreigners will not have the right to vote nor will they ever be allowed to hold political office.
According to the Limbaugh Laws, if you’re in our country, you cannot be a burden to taxpayers.
You are not entitled, ever, to welfare, to food stamps, or other government goodies.
You can come if you invest here, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage. If you don’t have that amount of money you have to stay home. If you do come and you want to buy land you will not be allowed to buy waterfront property in the United States. That will be reserved for citizens naturally born in this country. As a foreigner, you must relinquish individual rights to property.
You don’t have the right to protest when you come here. You’re allowed no demonstrations, you cannot wave a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies or you get sent home.
You’re a foreigner. You shut your mouth or you get out, and if you come here illegally, you go straight to jail and we’re going to hunt you down ’til we find you.
These are the Limbaugh Laws.
I can imagine many of you think that the Limbaugh Laws are pretty harsh. Well, let me tell you this, every one of the laws I just mentioned are actual laws of Mexico, today. I just read you Mexican immigration law. That’s how the Mexican government handles immigrants to their country.

The source is Rush Limbaugh.

[JES]

Crime and culture, like I said. One guy I read is even speculating that Europe will be Muslim by 2100. The debate has now shifted from what is good economically, and how they can help impoverished people to whether their very culture, religion and way of life are threatened. Our immigration issues pale in comparison IMO. Crime is an issue, but Mexican immigrants bring strong families, Christian faith and a desire to work hard and earn a living. Perhaps fear and culture is a better way to put it. Sometimes the fear is justified by real crime, and other times the issue is just fear.

[PerryChase]

PD, you can immigrate to Mexico and after due process, you can become a Mexican citizen with all the rights accorded to citizens. Many Europeans have come to Mexico that same way. The same applies to America.

Immigrants in America are guests and can be deported for almost any type of violation of the law. We choose not to in many cases, but our immigrations laws are not lenient.  It's the enforcement of the law that is lacking.   As you may have read, many muslim legal immigrants have been deported for technicalities because they simply were persona non-grata.

I support legal immigration.   And I support legalizing the people who are already here.   

[PD]

I support legal immigration. I do not support legalizing everyone who is already here, that just encourages illegal immigration.

[Diego Mamani]

PD: I agree that not all anti-immigrant types are racist. But it makes me wonder when their main argument is that “they come here to get public services for free”. I’m also a bit disappointed that an otherwise smart Piggingtonian like you listens to Limbaugh.

I would be really surprised if the Mexican laws expressly disallow bilingual education. Probably there’s none in Mexico because (1) they can’t afford it, and (2) there’s no need for it. Regarding buying waterfront property, that is standard in many countries that are small or weak (compared to the USA) and who fear that foreigners can buy a big chunk of land and then secede (by the way, that’s pretty much how Mexico lost Texas).

There are no food stamps for foreigners in Mexico? That’s the case in the USA also, even if the anti-immigrants say otherwise. In any case, developing countries have negligible budgets for this type of subsidies, which are directed to the truly indigent. Many of the other “we don’t have it for foreigners” items listed in Limbaugh’s diatribe are things that most developing countries simply don’t have for anybody b/c they can’t afford them. And restrictions on certain types of property ownership simply reflect the fact that Mexico lost 50% of its territory in the 1850s.

Like Micheel Moore at the opposite end of the political spectrum, Limbaugh stretches and twists the truth to make his point. The problem I see is that he’s indirectly inciting many to hate, or to join vigilante groups.

[PD]

So just because we can afford certain programs, we should offer them to illegals? I’m not buying that.

As for listening to Limbaugh, I don’t actually tune in to his show (not that there is anything wrong with people who do), although I have heard a few. A friend sent me an email some time ago with this quote. I agree with many things he has to say and disagree with many things he has to say.

You claim he is “inciting many to hate, or to join vigilante groups.” How would you know that if you don’t listen to him yourself?

[Diego Mamani]

“So just because we can afford certain programs, we should offer them to illegals? I’m not buying that.”

I never made that argument. My point is that Mexico can’t afford food stamps, etc. Again, immigration is not about public services or programs, it’s about the wage differential between the two countries. The fact that you refer to human beings as “illegals” says a lot about you, such as your belief that immigrants come to this country for free public services. (I’m perfectly aware that I won’t be able to change your belief, as it is an article of faith.)

“How would you know that if you don’t listen to him yourself?”

There’s no need to listen to him. I just read your posting. What other conclusion can be derived from Limbaugh’s diatribe? His harangue can be summarized as “we don’t have to welcome them because they don’t welcome others”.

[Author]

Posts