Joe Legal vs Jose Illegal

[moneymaker]

“If you think about real estate. A house can be just as well built with legal or illegal construction workers. The house itself does not care.”

This reminds me of a few years ago when I was in El Cajon there was a young kid,hispanic who spoke spanish who was using a nail gun during “construction” of one of those apt-to-condo things. Well he was mindlessly nailing the plywood with the gun, just trying to get it stuck back together, it was hilarious and sad at the same time. I wonder how many pipes or wires he must have hit?

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

The argument that undocumented aliens are a huge drain on the system has long been debunked. In some counties and states their contributions are less than associated costs. In others they are more.

No it hasn’t been debunked. The supposed ‘debunk’ was through a straw man argument. The taxes that the illegal would owe on income would flow back to the state through sales taxes. What exposes the straw man is that the U.S. operates as an income tax not a VAT tax system. If it were VAT, we would see sales taxes of 15% and higher. The attempted ‘debunkers’ closed off the argument to the effect that the drop in agricultural costs and resulting drop in food prices more than offsets any cost to the U.S. and that most people in the U.S. don’t want those type of jobs anyway. This attempted diversion ignores the simple fact that introduction of the illegals to the labor pool depresses the lower wage range at a cost to the lower and lower middle classes and that some people actually would take that job.

As previously mentioned by at least one other poster, payment of social security and medicare taxes by those who will never receive any benefits is a huge gain for the system.

Red Herring. Answer me this: How can they pay into the system without a Social Security Number (legal citizen) or Taxpayer ID Number(green card). There is not mechanism for the social security system to accept such money without either associated IDs.. which an illegal does not have. There is also no mechanism to collect income taxes without either Social Security ID or Taxpayer ID.

On education, if I understand you to be saying that you believe that children of citizens are more worthy of an education than those of non-citizens,

Yes.

solely based upon where their parents were born,

No. Remember, many citizens are legal immigrants. Heck, unless you are American Indian, we all are immigrants or descended from immigrants. Lets make it easier for you. Lets change Joe to Juan in the above example. Juan Legal (from Mexico) took the legal path to citizenship; including the tests, waiting period, not being a felon etc. Jose is still Jose Illegal. Would it be right to force Juan to sacrifice some of the quality in his kids education to help improve the education quality of Jose Illegal’s kids? even considering that Jose could have taken the legal path to citizenship like Juan Legal?[/quote]

ucodegen,

Your posts are spot-on. Don’t let the emotional and personal attacks bother you. It simply means they don’t have a valid, logical argument.

Keep up the good work.

——————

BTW, I’d much prefer paying $3.00 per head of lettuce than $.50, if it meant the worker who picked it was legal and earning a livable wage and good benefits; but that’s just me.

I will never fall for the argument that cheaper produce (and we really don’t **know** that, do we?) is worth overwhelming our physical, financial, and social infrastructure with people who are paying less in taxes than they take out **and don’t have the legal right to be here.**

The Mexicans need to fix the problems in their own country, and I think most Americans would be much more open to supporting that goal (with financial and military assistance, if need be) instead of shipping all of Mexico’s burdens to us.

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

The argument that undocumented aliens are a huge drain on the system has long been debunked. In some counties and states their contributions are less than associated costs. In others they are more.

No it hasn’t been debunked. The supposed ‘debunk’ was through a straw man argument. The taxes that the illegal would owe on income would flow back to the state through sales taxes. What exposes the straw man is that the U.S. operates as an income tax not a VAT tax system. If it were VAT, we would see sales taxes of 15% and higher. The attempted ‘debunkers’ closed off the argument to the effect that the drop in agricultural costs and resulting drop in food prices more than offsets any cost to the U.S. and that most people in the U.S. don’t want those type of jobs anyway. This attempted diversion ignores the simple fact that introduction of the illegals to the labor pool depresses the lower wage range at a cost to the lower and lower middle classes and that some people actually would take that job.

As previously mentioned by at least one other poster, payment of social security and medicare taxes by those who will never receive any benefits is a huge gain for the system.

Red Herring. Answer me this: How can they pay into the system without a Social Security Number (legal citizen) or Taxpayer ID Number(green card). There is not mechanism for the social security system to accept such money without either associated IDs.. which an illegal does not have. There is also no mechanism to collect income taxes without either Social Security ID or Taxpayer ID.

On education, if I understand you to be saying that you believe that children of citizens are more worthy of an education than those of non-citizens,

Yes.

solely based upon where their parents were born,

No. Remember, many citizens are legal immigrants. Heck, unless you are American Indian, we all are immigrants or descended from immigrants. Lets make it easier for you. Lets change Joe to Juan in the above example. Juan Legal (from Mexico) took the legal path to citizenship; including the tests, waiting period, not being a felon etc. Jose is still Jose Illegal. Would it be right to force Juan to sacrifice some of the quality in his kids education to help improve the education quality of Jose Illegal’s kids? even considering that Jose could have taken the legal path to citizenship like Juan Legal?[/quote]

ucodegen,

Your posts are spot-on. Don’t let the emotional and personal attacks bother you. It simply means they don’t have a valid, logical argument.

Keep up the good work.

——————

BTW, I’d much prefer paying $3.00 per head of lettuce than $.50, if it meant the worker who picked it was legal and earning a livable wage and good benefits; but that’s just me.

I will never fall for the argument that cheaper produce (and we really don’t **know** that, do we?) is worth overwhelming our physical, financial, and social infrastructure with people who are paying less in taxes than they take out **and don’t have the legal right to be here.**

The Mexicans need to fix the problems in their own country, and I think most Americans would be much more open to supporting that goal (with financial and military assistance, if need be) instead of shipping all of Mexico’s burdens to us.

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

The argument that undocumented aliens are a huge drain on the system has long been debunked. In some counties and states their contributions are less than associated costs. In others they are more.

No it hasn’t been debunked. The supposed ‘debunk’ was through a straw man argument. The taxes that the illegal would owe on income would flow back to the state through sales taxes. What exposes the straw man is that the U.S. operates as an income tax not a VAT tax system. If it were VAT, we would see sales taxes of 15% and higher. The attempted ‘debunkers’ closed off the argument to the effect that the drop in agricultural costs and resulting drop in food prices more than offsets any cost to the U.S. and that most people in the U.S. don’t want those type of jobs anyway. This attempted diversion ignores the simple fact that introduction of the illegals to the labor pool depresses the lower wage range at a cost to the lower and lower middle classes and that some people actually would take that job.

As previously mentioned by at least one other poster, payment of social security and medicare taxes by those who will never receive any benefits is a huge gain for the system.

Red Herring. Answer me this: How can they pay into the system without a Social Security Number (legal citizen) or Taxpayer ID Number(green card). There is not mechanism for the social security system to accept such money without either associated IDs.. which an illegal does not have. There is also no mechanism to collect income taxes without either Social Security ID or Taxpayer ID.

On education, if I understand you to be saying that you believe that children of citizens are more worthy of an education than those of non-citizens,

Yes.

solely based upon where their parents were born,

No. Remember, many citizens are legal immigrants. Heck, unless you are American Indian, we all are immigrants or descended from immigrants. Lets make it easier for you. Lets change Joe to Juan in the above example. Juan Legal (from Mexico) took the legal path to citizenship; including the tests, waiting period, not being a felon etc. Jose is still Jose Illegal. Would it be right to force Juan to sacrifice some of the quality in his kids education to help improve the education quality of Jose Illegal’s kids? even considering that Jose could have taken the legal path to citizenship like Juan Legal?[/quote]

ucodegen,

Your posts are spot-on. Don’t let the emotional and personal attacks bother you. It simply means they don’t have a valid, logical argument.

Keep up the good work.

——————

BTW, I’d much prefer paying $3.00 per head of lettuce than $.50, if it meant the worker who picked it was legal and earning a livable wage and good benefits; but that’s just me.

I will never fall for the argument that cheaper produce (and we really don’t **know** that, do we?) is worth overwhelming our physical, financial, and social infrastructure with people who are paying less in taxes than they take out **and don’t have the legal right to be here.**

The Mexicans need to fix the problems in their own country, and I think most Americans would be much more open to supporting that goal (with financial and military assistance, if need be) instead of shipping all of Mexico’s burdens to us.

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

The argument that undocumented aliens are a huge drain on the system has long been debunked. In some counties and states their contributions are less than associated costs. In others they are more.

No it hasn’t been debunked. The supposed ‘debunk’ was through a straw man argument. The taxes that the illegal would owe on income would flow back to the state through sales taxes. What exposes the straw man is that the U.S. operates as an income tax not a VAT tax system. If it were VAT, we would see sales taxes of 15% and higher. The attempted ‘debunkers’ closed off the argument to the effect that the drop in agricultural costs and resulting drop in food prices more than offsets any cost to the U.S. and that most people in the U.S. don’t want those type of jobs anyway. This attempted diversion ignores the simple fact that introduction of the illegals to the labor pool depresses the lower wage range at a cost to the lower and lower middle classes and that some people actually would take that job.

As previously mentioned by at least one other poster, payment of social security and medicare taxes by those who will never receive any benefits is a huge gain for the system.

Red Herring. Answer me this: How can they pay into the system without a Social Security Number (legal citizen) or Taxpayer ID Number(green card). There is not mechanism for the social security system to accept such money without either associated IDs.. which an illegal does not have. There is also no mechanism to collect income taxes without either Social Security ID or Taxpayer ID.

On education, if I understand you to be saying that you believe that children of citizens are more worthy of an education than those of non-citizens,

Yes.

solely based upon where their parents were born,

No. Remember, many citizens are legal immigrants. Heck, unless you are American Indian, we all are immigrants or descended from immigrants. Lets make it easier for you. Lets change Joe to Juan in the above example. Juan Legal (from Mexico) took the legal path to citizenship; including the tests, waiting period, not being a felon etc. Jose is still Jose Illegal. Would it be right to force Juan to sacrifice some of the quality in his kids education to help improve the education quality of Jose Illegal’s kids? even considering that Jose could have taken the legal path to citizenship like Juan Legal?[/quote]

ucodegen,

Your posts are spot-on. Don’t let the emotional and personal attacks bother you. It simply means they don’t have a valid, logical argument.

Keep up the good work.

——————

BTW, I’d much prefer paying $3.00 per head of lettuce than $.50, if it meant the worker who picked it was legal and earning a livable wage and good benefits; but that’s just me.

I will never fall for the argument that cheaper produce (and we really don’t **know** that, do we?) is worth overwhelming our physical, financial, and social infrastructure with people who are paying less in taxes than they take out **and don’t have the legal right to be here.**

The Mexicans need to fix the problems in their own country, and I think most Americans would be much more open to supporting that goal (with financial and military assistance, if need be) instead of shipping all of Mexico’s burdens to us.

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

The argument that undocumented aliens are a huge drain on the system has long been debunked. In some counties and states their contributions are less than associated costs. In others they are more.

No it hasn’t been debunked. The supposed ‘debunk’ was through a straw man argument. The taxes that the illegal would owe on income would flow back to the state through sales taxes. What exposes the straw man is that the U.S. operates as an income tax not a VAT tax system. If it were VAT, we would see sales taxes of 15% and higher. The attempted ‘debunkers’ closed off the argument to the effect that the drop in agricultural costs and resulting drop in food prices more than offsets any cost to the U.S. and that most people in the U.S. don’t want those type of jobs anyway. This attempted diversion ignores the simple fact that introduction of the illegals to the labor pool depresses the lower wage range at a cost to the lower and lower middle classes and that some people actually would take that job.

As previously mentioned by at least one other poster, payment of social security and medicare taxes by those who will never receive any benefits is a huge gain for the system.

Red Herring. Answer me this: How can they pay into the system without a Social Security Number (legal citizen) or Taxpayer ID Number(green card). There is not mechanism for the social security system to accept such money without either associated IDs.. which an illegal does not have. There is also no mechanism to collect income taxes without either Social Security ID or Taxpayer ID.

On education, if I understand you to be saying that you believe that children of citizens are more worthy of an education than those of non-citizens,

Yes.

solely based upon where their parents were born,

No. Remember, many citizens are legal immigrants. Heck, unless you are American Indian, we all are immigrants or descended from immigrants. Lets make it easier for you. Lets change Joe to Juan in the above example. Juan Legal (from Mexico) took the legal path to citizenship; including the tests, waiting period, not being a felon etc. Jose is still Jose Illegal. Would it be right to force Juan to sacrifice some of the quality in his kids education to help improve the education quality of Jose Illegal’s kids? even considering that Jose could have taken the legal path to citizenship like Juan Legal?[/quote]

ucodegen,

Your posts are spot-on. Don’t let the emotional and personal attacks bother you. It simply means they don’t have a valid, logical argument.

Keep up the good work.

——————

BTW, I’d much prefer paying $3.00 per head of lettuce than $.50, if it meant the worker who picked it was legal and earning a livable wage and good benefits; but that’s just me.

I will never fall for the argument that cheaper produce (and we really don’t **know** that, do we?) is worth overwhelming our physical, financial, and social infrastructure with people who are paying less in taxes than they take out **and don’t have the legal right to be here.**

The Mexicans need to fix the problems in their own country, and I think most Americans would be much more open to supporting that goal (with financial and military assistance, if need be) instead of shipping all of Mexico’s burdens to us.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

[/quote]

The first time (racist screed) was not a personal attack. This one was. You can address it as you wish. But if you think that children, bearing no responsibility as to the situation they find themselves in, are less worthy than other children simply because of the legal status of their parents, then all three (arrogance, sense of superiority and entitlement) apply. There really is no getting around that.

As to the rest, yeah, if you ignore some of the evidence, and only accept that which supports your position, you’ll probably win every argument.

And shutting down discussion? We’re still talking. Stop your whining. You chose your words. If they lead to logical conclusions, don’t complain when those conclusions are exposed.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

[/quote]

The first time (racist screed) was not a personal attack. This one was. You can address it as you wish. But if you think that children, bearing no responsibility as to the situation they find themselves in, are less worthy than other children simply because of the legal status of their parents, then all three (arrogance, sense of superiority and entitlement) apply. There really is no getting around that.

As to the rest, yeah, if you ignore some of the evidence, and only accept that which supports your position, you’ll probably win every argument.

And shutting down discussion? We’re still talking. Stop your whining. You chose your words. If they lead to logical conclusions, don’t complain when those conclusions are exposed.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

[/quote]

The first time (racist screed) was not a personal attack. This one was. You can address it as you wish. But if you think that children, bearing no responsibility as to the situation they find themselves in, are less worthy than other children simply because of the legal status of their parents, then all three (arrogance, sense of superiority and entitlement) apply. There really is no getting around that.

As to the rest, yeah, if you ignore some of the evidence, and only accept that which supports your position, you’ll probably win every argument.

And shutting down discussion? We’re still talking. Stop your whining. You chose your words. If they lead to logical conclusions, don’t complain when those conclusions are exposed.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

[/quote]

The first time (racist screed) was not a personal attack. This one was. You can address it as you wish. But if you think that children, bearing no responsibility as to the situation they find themselves in, are less worthy than other children simply because of the legal status of their parents, then all three (arrogance, sense of superiority and entitlement) apply. There really is no getting around that.

As to the rest, yeah, if you ignore some of the evidence, and only accept that which supports your position, you’ll probably win every argument.

And shutting down discussion? We’re still talking. Stop your whining. You chose your words. If they lead to logical conclusions, don’t complain when those conclusions are exposed.

[SK in CV]

[quote=ucodegen]

, I am simply dumbfounded by your sense of superiority, arrogance and entitlement. Hopefully I misunderstand you.

Ah, another personal attack. Lets try dealing with the facts instead of using emotionally charged words and phrases in an attempt to tilt the discussion.. followed by a ‘naw, you couldn’t be that bad a person, I must be misunderstanding you’ type of phrase.

In your previous post, what was the point of even bringing up ‘racists screed’? Emotionally charged words, yes.. and it attempts to shut down discussion by trying to associate my position with that of a racist (something commonly viewed untenable). Thereby in that mechanism, it is also ‘name calling’ through association.

[/quote]

The first time (racist screed) was not a personal attack. This one was. You can address it as you wish. But if you think that children, bearing no responsibility as to the situation they find themselves in, are less worthy than other children simply because of the legal status of their parents, then all three (arrogance, sense of superiority and entitlement) apply. There really is no getting around that.

As to the rest, yeah, if you ignore some of the evidence, and only accept that which supports your position, you’ll probably win every argument.

And shutting down discussion? We’re still talking. Stop your whining. You chose your words. If they lead to logical conclusions, don’t complain when those conclusions are exposed.

[Arraya]

The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat: deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were sent out of the country during the 1930s–many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade before.

The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and traveled the highways in search of work.

El Rio – Mexican FSA Camp – 1940.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.

[Arraya]

The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat: deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were sent out of the country during the 1930s–many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade before.

The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and traveled the highways in search of work.

El Rio – Mexican FSA Camp – 1940.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.

[Arraya]

The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat: deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were sent out of the country during the 1930s–many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade before.

The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and traveled the highways in search of work.

El Rio – Mexican FSA Camp – 1940.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.

[Arraya]

The Great Depression of the 1930s hit Mexican immigrants especially hard. Along with the job crisis and food shortages that affected all U.S. workers, Mexicans and Mexican Americans had to face an additional threat: deportation. As unemployment swept the U.S., hostility to immigrant workers grew, and the government began a program of repatriating immigrants to Mexico. Immigrants were offered free train rides to Mexico, and some went voluntarily, but many were either tricked or coerced into repatriation, and some U.S. citizens were deported simply on suspicion of being Mexican. All in all, hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants, especially farmworkers, were sent out of the country during the 1930s–many of them the same workers who had been eagerly recruited a decade before.

The farmworkers who remained struggled to survive in desperate conditions. Bank foreclosures drove small farmers from their land, and large landholders cut back on their permanent workforce. As with many Southwestern farm families, a great number of Mexican American farmers discovered they had to take on a migratory existence and traveled the highways in search of work.

El Rio – Mexican FSA Camp – 1940.
Many found temporary stability in the migrant work camps established by the U.S. Farm Security Administration, or FSA. The FSA camps provided housing, food, and medicine for migrant farm families, as well as protection from criminal elements that often took advantage of vulnerable migrants. The FSA set up several camps specifically for Mexican Americans in an attempt to create safe havens from violent attacks.

[Author]

Posts