Friday, June 08, 2007

Cheap Labor In Peril

When Jerry Brown, CA AG, gets up on CNN and says that agriculture is in trouble because cheap labor won't be available without the Immigration Act, because these people will work for wages an American can't live on. Yes, that was a part of his argument. You have to understand that work is not to be rewarded in a plutocratic society, only the elite gets to prosper. Lower blue collar wages have been trashed by THIS problem. It is surely not the only thing happening to wages but this one you can trace right straight back to Ronnie's amnesty.

Here's how that played out, so you have some background on what the upshot of this mess (the bill) is. Ronnie decided that there were too many illegals to deal with so he amnestied them. They promptly and understandably moved up out of those nasty paying jobs they were filling. Those holes were promptly filled by new illegals. The continued non-enforcement of law encouraged employers farther up the wage scale to engage in exactly the same behavior as their agricultural cousins. If a farmer can't compete with legal wages in the face of their cheating bretheren he follows suit and the trend moves up with the violations. The result is something other than economic justice. For ANY workers, whatever color, religion, sexual orientation, or national origin.

If a real employment verification system and serious conswquences were set up this would not be the outcome. The immigration law violators on both sides of the equation have no imperative to comply, the status quo simply continues. A fence is not going to keep determined people out and they are determined because there is a great big fat magnet called NO ENFORCEMENT. You will notice that it is not a feature of the Act, that would slap the plutocrats.

How it is supposed to be fair and of benefit to illegal immigrants to continue the depression of wage and the continuation of the creation of a disenfranchised serf class is beyond me. That is exactly what this mess does. They get paid crap, a wage an American won't take, which part of that is good? Legal hiring and living wages happen when the work is worth being paid for, if there are no willing pickers at substandard wages all those wages go up and if there are very serious consequences for violation on either side it ceases. How is it racist to insist a living wage be paid?

You can't deal with 12-20million people, you certainly can. When illegal employment is cut off and when fraudulent use of social services is cut off the magnet disappears and the pressure to legalize your behavior is huge. That does create a situation where a carrot needs to be offered, but carrots aren't supposed to be cakes. Leave and we'll work out a good deal to come back in, but not at the expense of the American worker and that means actual limits which is not proposed Don't leave and fix yourself - you get hurt. Don't fix your hiring - you get hurt. Surely.

George W Bush likes this mess, if that isn't an automatic disqualification for "progressives" then what is? He has at no point in his Presidency ever backed the American worker, to the contrary, he has consistently cut their throats. This is not different. It makes me furious to watch good hearted people increase the misery of their fellow citizens in pursuit of a "feel good" solution. It has to be understood that there are losers in this equation, no matter how you approach it, so you are forced into choosing who they are. Facing reality can be difficult when emotions are so strong, clear thinking is required when you propose to hurt people. You cannot just have it both ways, maybe after RR's amnesty there was a chance to minimize the hurt but it was so easy to look away. Now Congress and BushCo proposed to do exactly that again, how much more pain will that cause? I'm not heartless, do you have a conscience?

9 comments:

Orygunner said...

George W Bush likes this mess, if that isn't an automatic disqualification for "progressives" then what is? He has at no point in his Presidency ever backed the American worker, to the contrary, he has consistently cut their throats.

Yep. Pretty astonishing that so many Dems---even union leaders---are willing to make a deal with the devil like this. One would think that W's unqualified support of this travesty of a bill would be reason enough to hate it.

I see this support for amnesty as a bipartisan stab in the back of the American working class. And the more they talk about it, the more they twist the blade. Why are the Dems doing this? I used to think they cared about American workers, but I guess I was sorely mistaken.

Steve Culley said...

I think I'm going to scream if I hear anybody else say "a fence won't keep them out". Am I supossed to believe that stringing wire around our positions in Viet Nam did no good? A fence is mainly there as a clear cut warning, do not cross or you will arrested or if you want to haul in drugs, shot. An unguarded fence would be a minor inconvenience but enforcement of that boundary is the key. Haven't seen any of that during my lifetime.
Now let's get on with it. This bill sucked. Who actually believes that GWB was going to enforce anything on the border? Why would we believe that workplace enforcement was going to happen? A perfect record of no enforcement would make me think that it was shamnesty. Another 1986 on a grand compromise scale.
The question of anchor babies was not addressed. There was no medical checks for disease. MS 13 members could sign a pledge to be good guys and be on track for citizenship in 24 hours. What about chain migration? The list that made this bill a turkey is too long to go into here but I want to pose the real question that most lefties won't bring themselves to ask. How many people is enough? We have 300 million now and I have never heard one of my environmental friends question the effects on the environment of a constant, rapid, never ending population growth, fueled mostly by immigration. What I get from them is always a new freedom restricting proposal to mitigate the effects of population growth, measure 37 repeal to be specific, while spouting some dumb cliche like "we are a nation of immigrants". They will tell you to turn in your 8 pistons for a four, then welcome 10 immigrants who also want to drive.
Give me a break. It's time to stop admitting 2 million legals every year and who knows how many illegals. We import more immigrants than the rest of the world combined. It's time to call a hault. We already resemble the Roman empire with their dependence on the barbarian to build their homes, farm their land and fight their wars. I truly hope that efforts of groups like the Minute Men, Oregonians for Immigration reform, Numbers USA and others who defeated this comprhensive amnesty bill was a turning point in American history.

Chuck Butcher said...

Yes Steve I know the fence is a clear warning, but in the case you're referring to the fence was backed up with claymores & automatic weapon fire - maybe a bit much for this fence.

Uncontrolled immigration is insanity,yes. But we have to figure out something that works, Orygunner. I've made some proposals scattered through this blog, I'm sure they're inadequate in some respects, but I have a life to deal with outside this issue and even outside politics.

There is no painless solution, now, so let's ALL stop acting like there is. That's part of the problem, the pros and the antis act as though you can just wave a wand at this. You can't do it. None of that is to indicate that this mess deserved to see the light of day, much less debate.

Steve Culley said...

Love it when lefties get involved in my security. Take Bill Richardson for instance. On the presidential debate he said, "if we build a 10 foot fence, they will make 11 foot ladders" as if case closed. Let's add another component. A 10 foot fence, an 11 foot ladder, and a 28 inch barrel. If you are an invader you have a choice to make. After adding that last component the situation changes. The invasion stops because we are serious. Stop! and be arrested or run at your peril. Don't shoot at border agents while transporting drugs or exspect gunships.
Take Hillary on the debate. She is in favor of a national language but not official language "because then you can't print ballots in another language". Whoops! Guess she forgot part of the comprehensive amnesty bill you had to learn English to get your citizenship. So we get double talk again.
Bull shit doesn't stop an invasion.

joycemocha said...

There are times when I think Ed Abbey had it right.

But--Jerry Brown? *That* Jerry Brown said that? Former Gov, former mayor of Oakland?

Boggle. Sigh.

Chuck Butcher said...

*that* Jerry Brown.

Border patrol are police, Steve, and they operate under pretty much the same rules. I am unamused by an essentially unpunished crime spree on the border, but I am also unconvinced of the wisdom or even ethics of shooting people out of hand. I'm not even sure it would be a real deterrent.

We need to measure the desperation that drives people to leave their home to work in a country where they are at least unappreciated, against what value a fence has as a stop. That means there is a huge draw - that is the place to attack the problem, crossing is a symptom of the problem - the cause is the draw, the jobs and srvices.

Steve Culley said...

Don't have any problem with enforcement right here against those who profit by importing a slave class and my pet peeve adding more people. Got to remember that Oregon's lefties mitigate the population negative effects by restricing freedoms, plan and zone, make everyone live in a city, like it or not becausewe had too many people in 1973. Then we added 100 million more, 90 % diredtly tied to the 1965 immigration reform bill, guess what name was prominent then. Kennedy. Nope I'm fed up, close that damned border, fine employers, deport many, starting with criminals.
Again, niie talk hasn't worked on illegal immigration. It's time to send the message that Americans have turned a corner and intend to get serious. If that message goes out the flow will stop. As it is now the word will soon be out that democrats have a good chance of winning in 2008 and you better head north and get in the amnesty line. Couple of gun shots and the word goes back. Border is a dangerous place. Don't try it. And many who would have died in the Arizona heat will live.
Now if you want to change things I'm all for internal changes in Mexico. I'm a little old to travel that far and join an insurgency but wouldn't mind seeing our government encourage major changes down there. The Mexican poor resemble my early farm life. I understand. However it is my country and I intend to see it remain so. Enough crap.

Orygunner said...

I don't think a fence is going to be effective, even if it is strung all the way across the border. Drug runners and coyotes are fully capable of breaching current fences. Waste of money for what amounts to a useless symbol. I want effective enforcement strategies, not political symbolism.

I'd like to see more discussions among the politicians and pundits about employer enforcement. Our illegal alien problem is due entirely to our illegal employer problem. The illegals wouldn't be here if businesses didn't hire them. Enforcement was half-assed under Clinton, but it's been totally non-existent under Bush. But I guess there's no point in doing workplace raids when your plan is to give them all amnesty anyway....

We need to make it impossible for illegals to live here (no jobs, no gov't IDs, no bank accounts, no schools, no nothing). Most will eventually deport themselves.

Orygunner said...

Steve Culley: I agree with your point about the environmental impact of mass immigration and the cognitive disconnect among enviros. I don't consider myself a liberal, progressive, or lefty of any kind, but I am an environmentalist (in the Ed Abbey tradition). And I think mass immigration is clearly one of the top threats to the American environment. Unfortunately I seem to be in a small minority among my fellow treehuggers. I think most are just terrified of being labeled "racist" or "xenophobic" and alienating their liberal allies. And some are so thoroughly wedded to the progressive movement that they are willing to compromise the environment in order to achieve social goals.

You make a great point about M37 and uncontrolled population growth. I just came across FAIR's analysis of the impact of mass immigration on Oregon. They write: "The Pew Hispanic Center estimates the illegal alien population of the state at 125,000 to 175,000 as of 2005." That's the equivalent of the entire city of Salem. And they keep on coming, encouraged by all this talk of amnesty and by our state and local governments' sanctuary policies....