Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Reason Writers Around Town: Shikha Dalmia on Immigration
Over at Bloggingheads.tv, Reason Foundation Senior Analyst Shikha Dalmia discusses immigration, welfare, deportation, and much more with Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. Click on the image below to watch.
|8.18.08 @ 12:05PM|#
I watched this video "debate" on bloggingheads this weekend. And
what I want to know is what someone from Reason is doing debating
this guy? The organization that he represents - Center for
Immigration Studies -- has its genesis in some of the most
vitriolic hate groups such as FAIR, whose founder, John Tanton,
reprinted in the US for the first time the fascist-racist book by
French writer Jean Raspail called Camp of Saints that depicts
France under siege by dark-skinned Indians who have sailed to its
shores demanding asylum. If you don't believe this, check out this
video by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an outfit that tracks
hate groups:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpiq1nAK4a0&eurl=http://www.wecanstopthehate.org/
Tanton, for whom Krikorian worked at FAIR, earned widespread
notoriety when he ridiculed Hispanic fertility rates by saying that
for the first time in history "those with their pants down have
caught those with their pants up."
I appreciated Dalmia's earnest - and indignant -- presentation of
facts. But does she really believe that someone who last week
released a study showing that immigration leads to dangerous
increases in greenhouse gases (really - I'm not making this up,
check the CIS website here:
http://www.cis.org/GreenhouseGasEmissions) is really interested in
"facts"?
I respect Reason's work on immigration. But was it necessary to
take on this reactionary and legitimize him? Are you this desperate
for attention? What's next from Reason? A debate with David Duke on
affirmative action?
thoreau|8.18.08 @ 12:21PM|#
I just love the idea of using Shikha "Hummers are greener than Priuses" Dalmia to debunk anybody.
|8.18.08 @ 12:25PM|#
But was it necessary to take on this reactionary and
legitimize him?
To be fair, CIS and FAIR and the like are cited and interviewed by
mainstream media such as NPR all the time. Considering that a large
majority of the population is against free migration, their
essential talking points are not far out of line from public
opinion.
Nonetheless, I have not paid enough attention to CIS or FAIR to
know whether they are particularly ruder than the average
anti-immigration person.
Sheldon Richman|8.18.08 @ 12:27PM|#
Great job, Shikha! You had the moral, political, and economic arguments. You had the data. What did Krikorian have? Not much. Bravo!
|8.18.08 @ 12:38PM|#
She probably thinks that the battery production involved for
Priuses involves creation of more waste than is involved in the
creation of a Hummer.
Even if it's true, it's not *HELPFUL*.
|8.18.08 @ 12:39PM|#
Tom Swift:
You are right Sir, only people who engage in correct thinking
should ever be allowed to speak.
|8.18.08 @ 12:42PM|#
MikeP:
Tom Swift is right about CIS. Check out the video. Part of the
problem is that CIS has done a masterful job in the last five in
burying its FAIR connection and getting mainstream media attention.
But the fact that it opposes ALL forms of immigration -- legal and
illegal, skilled and unskilled -- should tip you off. Doesnt seem
to me that this is a mainstream view or that of the American
majority.
Orange Line Special|8.18.08 @ 12:42PM|#
Reason should thank "Tom Swift" for his "concern", but Reason
might want to wonder exactly who would use the word "reactionary"
in a non-ironic sense.
And, in the interests of intellectual honesty, Reason might want to
consider that the SPLC has an indirect link to the
MexicanGovernment, being part of a group headed by someone with a
long series of links to that government and who's been hired by
them.
And, needless to say, there have been at least two major exposes of
their group. And, they recently misled about some
statistics.
The bottom line here is the bottom line: those who try to smear CIS
and who support Reason's position generally have some interest of
some kind, whether monetary or electoral.
Regarding Reason's motivations, read up on the Kochtopus
for a start.
|8.18.08 @ 12:46PM|#
And what I want to know is what someone from Reason is doing
debating this guy?
Umm, free market of ideas? Good speech driving out bad? All
that?
She seriously said that?
It was all over the place a year or so ago. Based on some shady
assumptions about longevity of both, AFAIK.
Still, the environmental impact (both making and disposing) of
current generation Prius batteries would have the greenies up in
arms if it wasn't part of one of their pet projects.
|8.18.08 @ 12:47PM|#
Anon:
This is a red herring: the issue is not whether he should be
allowed to speak. He has spoken plenty. The only question is
whether REASON should talk to him and so help to publicize and
legitimize his views.
thoreau|8.18.08 @ 12:51PM|#
RC-
Yes, the Prius batteries probably aren't as clean as they're made
out to be. However, the assumptions in the study that she cited
seemed to involve some selective double-counting.
The problem wasn't that she cast doubts on the Prius battery. The
problem was that she did so with the weakest case possible.
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/114767.html
|8.18.08 @ 12:57PM|#
thoreau: can you please go take your ritalin and stay on topic
for two seconds.
MikeP: Just to add to what Rob Crusoe said, it seems to me that
immigrants can't win with Krikorian. Highly skilled immigrants are
bad because they might make great economic contributions but are
unable to emotionally assimilate with America; unskilled immigrants
are bad because they don't economically assimilate and live off
welfare. They give us leporsy and greenhouse gas emissions. This is
Krikorian's argument!
|8.18.08 @ 1:01PM|#
Rob Crusoe:
It's a debate. To have a debate, you have to have people with
opposing views.
|8.18.08 @ 1:03PM|#
I of course vehemently disagree with Krikorian's arguments and have always disliked what I've heard from him. But he is not called a nut by the mainstream media -- unlike, say, David Duke -- so he should not be disregarded as a nut by Reason. If someone has a chance to refute his idiocy, I think she should take it.
dhex|8.18.08 @ 1:10PM|#
exactly who would use the word "reactionary" in a non-ironic
sense.
for starters, it describes you pretty durn well.
also i heard the southern poverty law center ate MexicanFood once.
which of course makes me wish i had some CarneAsada with
BlackBeansAndRice.
thoreau|8.18.08 @ 1:17PM|#
I think credulity was the right word.
And, for the record, I'm generally a fan of open immigration. But
Shikha Dalmia is the last person that I would ask to defend my side
on, well, anything.
|8.18.08 @ 1:21PM|#
MikeP: Yes, what you say makes sense. Here is the problem. David Duke has at least this virtue: he pretty much lets you see who he is and what he stands for. The same is not true of Krikorian. He is playing a wicket game, hiding his real beliefs and motives. The arguments that he makes are largely just fronts for the more unsavory and racist views that motivate him. So by debating the arguments he puts forward you are just playing into his game, legitimizing his mask and agreeing to take it as his real face. People should be pointing out his real face and not debating whether they like this or that about his mask.
|8.18.08 @ 1:24PM|#
Zerg: Tom Swift said to take your ritalin, not your viagra. (But she is a hottie).
Zerg|8.18.08 @ 1:26PM|#
Rob Crusoe: my doc has me on wellbutrin for adhd. She doesn't believe in using stimulants as a long term treatment. surprisingly, wellbutrin also acts like viagra in some ways.
|8.18.08 @ 1:43PM|#
These politicians, advocates, pundits better realize that
illegal immigration is not going to be an issue they can brush
under the rug. Along with the Iraq War illegal immigration is
costing American taxpayers at all different levels of government at
least a trillion dollars each year.
Corrupt Incumbents need to thrown out of office? All & every
politician that doesn't sponsor the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) Any
elected official (Hired-help) which includes Governors, Mayors,
councilman, city managers who pander to the Special Interest lobby.
They should be tarred and feathered if they are in collusion with
foreign governments like Mexico.
If Americans don't fight back against the Globalist tyranny that
will swamp us with cheap labor. The Democrats who have gutted the
border fence funding, so we will be dealing with Overpopulation in
just 20 years.The drugs, the escalating crime rate and the wilting
nationwide economy. It's entirely up to 'THE PEOPLE' in the coming
months. Both parties are going to land America with another
AMNESTY.
Taxpayers will be paying for both the illegal immigration
insurgency and the welfare and profits for the predatory employers.
If your really want to know the unrestricted ugly truth not found
in the liberal-socialist press. If you want to do something about
job loses, your mortgage, your families future. Go to NUMBERSUSA
.
Ask your State representative energy conservation? How much gas,
oil and electricity we could save, if we sent illegal aliens
home.
We cannot keep up the demand for it right now! Oil! Diversity
Alliance for Sustainable America.(earthtimes) stated in it's
article that if the U.S. grants amnesty and gives citizenship to 12
to 30 million illegal migrants already here, as McCain, Obama and
the majority of Democrats propose. That all those naturalized
citizens could possibly add 120 million U.S. and foreign-born
relatives to the U.S., in the next 20 years whom all will CONSUME
MAJOR ENERGY. Does the American people need to escalate the 315
million plus population, the census estimates we have now? To a new
total of 435 million?
Massive negative consequences of illegal immigration on today's and
yesterdays economy. Illegal Immigration is all enveloping our
economy! Everything! Obama, McCain, Governors, Mayors, Councilors,
City managers take notice! 80 percent of the American people are
watching! How many more nefarious companies out their, violating
safety and immigration laws. When ICE knocks on the door
eventually--and they will, under the Federal SAVE ACT. Deportation
is an absolute certainty. Whereas, voluntary 'ATTRITION' means you
can re-apply like all the millions of legal immigrants.
Overpopulation, traffic congestion, urban sprawl, pollution,
environmental damage, water, oil, gas, energy diminishing
resources, contagious diseases, lack of affordable housing,
depressed wages of US citizens, underground economic, fraudulent
documents, identity theft, Sanctuary cities, predatory businesses
tax evasion, soaring nationwide crime rate growth , increased
taxpayer burdens, $$$ going across the border, overseas,
overcrowded schools, uneducated legal children, overcrowded
prisons, inadequate health care for legal residents, but free
health care for illegal immigrants.
The balkanization of our communities and a large and growing
population with loyalty to other Nations. Just read this disturbing
revelation of costs to the Taxpayer: GOOGLE these sites! Find the
truth? numbersusa, snopes-under-politics, fairus, capsweb,
americanpatrol, libertypost, vdare. Our politicians must endorse
the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) before the next AMNESTY bill.
|8.18.08 @ 2:01PM|#
If you don't believe this, check out this video by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an outfit that tracks hate groups
The SPLC also considers the Ludwig von Mises Institute to be a
neo-Confederist organization, so I can't give much credence to
their pronouncements. Hell, these were the guys who invented the
term "neo-confederist" just so they could brand LvMI with it. Yeah,
Krikorian is a douche, but so is SPLC.
|8.18.08 @ 2:06PM|#
...illegal immigration is costing American taxpayers at all
different levels of government at least a trillion dollars each
year.
Please show your work.
|8.18.08 @ 2:18PM|#
Before attacking all those illiterate foreign hordes maybe Brittanicus should learn to write grammatical English.
Rhywun|8.18.08 @ 2:21PM|#
Before attacking all those illiterate foreign hordes maybe Brittanicus should learn to write grammatical English.
And pick an *American* name.
|8.18.08 @ 2:22PM|#
She probably thinks that the battery production involved for
Priuses involves creation of more waste than is involved in the
creation of a Hummer.
Even if it's true, it's not *HELPFUL*.
Really? The truth is not helpful?
Jaybird: Well, sure, the data behind our study is total bullshit
and all made up, but the conclusion it reaches is helpful, so let's
print it!
(Not saying the Prius / Hummer thing is true, just raking on this
notion that inconvenient facts that don't support one's pet causes
should be blithely ignored.)
|8.18.08 @ 2:23PM|#
Virtually every industrialized nation, China, Mexico, Great
Britain, the European Union, has taken steps to end illegal
immigration, remove illegal aliens, and to constrain legal
immigration to only that which is prudent, demonstrably necessary,
and above all other concerns, in the best interests of their native
population. It's dangerously misguided to suggest that the United
States not do likewise!
Too many people competing for the same limited resources cannot be
considered sound economic, environmental, social or cultural
policy. America cannot develop or conserve its way out of high
energy prices so long as new reserves and alternative resources are
consumed by population growth (through unconstrained immigration),
before these new resources are even brought on-line!
All of the most promising "alternative energy sources" require vast
amount of land and water to be viable, sustainable and affordable.
Land and water that is increasingly in short supply as the result
of overpopulation through immigration. Solar, wind, hydro, bio
fuels, all require lots of land and water. Most of these energy
resources would also need to be "grid adjacent" in order to be
financially feasable, and urban sprawl makes this an unlikely
possibility unless we take action to limit the overpopulation of
the United States. China let things go too far, and their
draconnian limits on births and sex selection policies would not be
acceptable in any democracy. Indeed, how can we expect democracy
and social justice to spread to other nations, so long as their
populations prefer to flee and take advantage of American
taxpayers?
thoreau|8.18.08 @ 2:39PM|#
What's not helpful is summarizing a study with questionable assumptions that was performed by an industry-sponsored marketing group. Not an industry-sponsored engineering firm or R&D shop or whatever, a marketing firm.
Librarian|8.18.08 @ 2:46PM|#
The organization that he represents - Center for Immigration
Studies -- has its genesis in some of the most vitriolic hate
groups such as FAIR, whose founder, John Tanton, reprinted in the
US for the first time the fascist-racist book by French writer Jean
Raspail called Camp of Saints that depicts France under siege by
dark-skinned Indians who have sailed to its shores demanding
asylum. If you don't believe this, check out this video by the
Southern Poverty Law Center, an outfit that tracks hate groups:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpiq1nAK4a0&eurl=http://www.wecanstopthehate.org/
Better still, download
and read the book yourself. It's so dripping in fascism, that
that bastion of right-wing nuttery, the Atlantic Monthly, took it
seriously enough to devote a cover story to
it.
|8.18.08 @ 2:57PM|#
Holy cow! Including the reference to last week's CIS insanity,
that now makes three screeds on this thread that have used energy
consumption as an argument against immigration.
Is this a case of, when you run out of good arguments, you must
resort to bad ones? Or is it more indicative of the correlation
between anti-immigrant stances and stupidity or, at the very least,
massive economic illiteracy?
|8.18.08 @ 3:19PM|#
MikeP:
Yes, how does one begin to correct this Malthusian nonsense. I
could give these folks a reading list -- but I'm not sure they can
read.
dhex|8.18.08 @ 3:27PM|#
Too many people competing for the same limited resources
cannot be considered sound economic, environmental, social or
cultural policy.
that's why i wanted to kick out the papist irish, but LoneWacko and
other ToolsOfTheVatican are preventing me.
|8.18.08 @ 3:39PM|#
No doubt! What kind of stupid people would welcome labor into the highest productivity per worker-hour economy on the planet when they could instead hoard natural resources like any other basket-case impoverished nation.
Rhywun|8.18.08 @ 3:57PM|#
Yeah, "everyone else is doing it so we should too" has never been a very good guiding principle for the United States, has it.
|8.18.08 @ 3:59PM|#
"...welcome labor into the highest productivity per worker-hour
economy on the planet..."
And this productivity was achieved through improved shoveling
techniques? Better mowing patterns?
Improved productivity, it seems to me, requires less people.
Mike Laursen|8.18.08 @ 5:00PM|#
Improved productivity, it seems to me, requires less
people.
I doubt productivity is a simple function of population.
|8.18.08 @ 5:17PM|#
Tanton, for whom Krikorian worked at FAIR, earned widespread
notoriety when he ridiculed Hispanic fertility rates by saying that
for the first time in history "those with their pants down
have caught those with their pants up."
That is a great line!
SeriousYahoo|8.18.08 @ 5:20PM|#
Krikorian says that the country's benefits from immigration come from "impoverishing poor Americans." Even the one or two studies restrictionists like to cite only claim at most a 5 percent decline in wages among "native high school dropouts" from immigrants. Even if that were true, and ignoring economic growth, capital investment and consumer benefits, that would hardly seem sufficient to "impoverish" poor Americans, who presumably are poor at the moment with or without immigrants. The highlight of the debate is probably when Krikorian doesn't even give immigrants credit for voluntarily joining the military, presumably preferring the forced conscription of people whose relatives immigrated prior to 1900.
asfda|8.18.08 @ 5:30PM|#
So by debating the arguments he puts forward you are just
playing into his game, legitimizing his mask and agreeing to take
it as his real face. People should be pointing out his real face
and not debating whether they like this or that about his
mask.
I.e., calling him a racist and hoping people will stop listening to
him? Good luck with that.
|8.18.08 @ 5:39PM|#
And this productivity was achieved through improved
shoveling techniques? Better mowing patterns?
Actually, yes. Bringing in immigrants to do low-skill jobs opens
the door/forces those now engaged in those jobs to move up to
higher-productivity jobs.
|8.18.08 @ 5:58PM|#
Improved productivity, it seems to me, requires less
people.
Mike Laursen and R C Dean have already given you two legs of the
answer.
The third leg is that higher skilled immigrants provide innovations
that admit capital improvements in labor productivity.
You might imagine that less labor means higher wages means greater
incentive for capital to invest in improvements to use less labor
at a higher price. But there are lots of things capital could be
doing. If an investor does not know that the labor will be there to
man his new factory, then -- rather than risk it on innovations
that just might work with less labor at a higher price -- he may
simply employ his capital elsewhere ...such as in some other
country that has a labor surplus.
Orange Line Special|8.18.08 @ 7:12PM|#
Yet another libruhtarian thread where they present only one side
of calculation, completely ignoring all the costs - direct and
indirect, financial and non-financial - of what they support.
When *everything* is taken into account, the costs of
MassAndIllegalImmigration aren't worth it. That's why you never see
those hacks even acknowledging many of those costs, such as giving
power to foreign countries and PoliticalCorruption.
|8.18.08 @ 7:48PM|#
I would contend that political corruption in the service of
protectionism and limited immigration is both theoretically and
empirically much much greater than political corruption in the
service of free trade and free migration.
As for giving power to foreign countries, that phobia of yours
needs to be justified by a lot more than vague connections of such
and so working both for some pro-immigration group and for some
present or former employee of a friendly government.
Mike Laursen|8.18.08 @ 9:05PM|#
Don't understand your giving power to foreign countries hypothesis. First, we'd be grabbing up their supply of people with smarts and gumption. Second, the folks that come here ain't in their old countries anymore, so those governments would have a much harder time using them as puppets, or in any way controlling their lives.
Disingenuity Magnet|8.18.08 @ 9:46PM|#
>Don't understand your giving power to foreign countries
hypothesis.
You must not read many newspapers, or for that matter, even Hit
& Run. See Georgia, South Ossetia, and Russia.
Anti-Globalism|8.18.08 @ 10:16PM|#
Before we get too far into this silly debate, what are the historical examples of successful pluralist societies?
Tacos mmm...|8.18.08 @ 10:40PM|#
You must not read many newspapers, or for that matter, even Hit & Run. See Georgia, South Ossetia, and Russia.
Kind of like how McCain's foreign policy advisor, Randy
Scheunemann, is a lobbyist for the nation of Georgia? Yeah, that
has a lot to do with immigration.
Tacos mmm...|8.18.08 @ 10:44PM|#
Before we get too far into this silly debate, what are the historical examples of successful pluralist societies?
Um... every sufficiently large society has been pluralist. Trade
and immigration have been around as long as there have been
cities.
One Out In The Third|8.18.08 @ 10:49PM|#
Shikha got smoked. She needs to get in touch with American reality...especially about what motivates Americans of ever race or religion to serve in the military.
Mike Laursen|8.18.08 @ 10:52PM|#
You must not read many newspapers, or for that matter, even
Hit & Run. See Georgia, South Ossetia, and Russia.
The MexicanGovernment is going to send in their tanks to crush our
tiny, fledgling republic? The analogy would work better if we were
in the practice of handing out United States passports to rebels in
Chiapas. Then decided to invade Mexico to protect them from the
MexicanGovernment.
Mike Laursen|8.18.08 @ 10:53PM|#
Before we get too far into this silly debate, what are the
historical examples of successful pluralist societies?
Umm, the United States of America.
|8.18.08 @ 11:11PM|#
Before we get too far into this silly debate, what are the
historical examples of successful pluralist societies?
Do you want to start with Babylonia, or would you rather start with
the earlier Sumerian societies that first integrated cities with
distant agrarian areas?
GILMORE|8.18.08 @ 11:45PM|#
Brittanicus | August 18, 2008, 1:43pm | #
"Brittanicus" can't produce sentences?
Wasnt there a time when crazy people even cared? Even
(ZeLoneShitforBrains) can do the subject+object+verb thing. From
time to time. With effort. But man... this is depressing.
|8.18.08 @ 11:53PM|#
"At the moment I oppose unlimited immigration. I think much of the
opposition to immigration is of that kind--because it's a
fundamental tenet of the American view that immigration is good,
that there would be no United States if there had not been
immigration. Of course, there are many things that are easier now
for immigrants than there used to be. . . ."
Did he mean there was much less pressure to integrate now than
there used to be? Milton: "I'm not sure that's true . . ." Rose
(speaking simultaneously): "That's the unfortunate thing . . ."
Milton: "But I don't think it's true . . ." Rose: "Oh, I think it
is! That's one of the problems, when immigrants come across and
want to remain Mexican." Milton: "Oh, but they came in the past and
wanted to be Italian, and be Jewish . . ." Rose: "No they didn't.
The ones that did went back."
Mass immigration is nothing but viagra for the state. More
immigration the larger the state becomes. It's not rocket science.
Corporate welfare pimps. Reason Foundation. Dump the expense on the
taxpayers.
|8.18.08 @ 11:59PM|#
Shikha Dalmia talking about assimilation at the turn of the century. Please, there was no internet, spanish language TV, radio etc etc. Those points she's throwing out are just standard nonsense these days. Especially to anyone that live in a border state.
|8.19.08 @ 12:38AM|#
It amazes me to no end that someone thinks proponents of an
individualist political philosophy will swoon and change their
minds because one of the great names of the movement has a
different opinion on something.
By the way, Milton Friedman also
said...
Look, for example, at the obvious, immediate, practical example of illegal Mexican immigration. Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It's a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It's a good thing for the United States. It's a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it's only good so long as its illegal.
That's an interesting paradox to think about. Make it legal and it's no good. Why? Because as long as it's illegal the people who come in do not qualify for welfare, they don't qualify for social security, they don't qualify for the other myriad of benefits that we pour out from our left pocket to our right pocket. So long as they don't qualify they migrate to jobs. They take jobs that most residents of this country are unwilling to take. They provide employers with the kind of workers that they cannot get. They're hard workers, they're good workers, and they are clearly better off.
|8.19.08 @ 12:43AM|#
Friedman was a long time resident of California. A state that has more immigration than any other. Used to be Reagan country. Now its controlled by radical unions via immigration. The health of the state===mass immigration. Massive income transfer mechanism in place. This isn't rocket science.
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 12:50AM|#
Now its controlled by radical unions via
immigration.
To which unions are you referring? The two biggees I can think of
in California are the teachers and prison guards. If those are the
unions to which you are referring, please explain how their
predominance is based on immigration. If you're thinking of some
other union, please explain further.
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 1:13AM|#
Shikha Dalmia talking about assimilation at the turn of the
century. Please, there was no internet, spanish language TV, radio
etc etc.
Mexican immigrants had all of those things at the turn of the
century. It was only seven and a half years ago.
And immigrants from Mexico had a lot of cultural entertainment
available to them at the previous turn of the century: Catholic
Church socials, quinceaneras, mariachi bands, spicy food, rodeos.
They still can find all those things today. Doesn't mean they
aren't assimilating.
In America, I thought assimilation doesn't have to mean complete
abandonment of your own enjoyable cultural traditions. Hell, you
can even mix in other people's cultural traditions. Call me a crazy
cosmotarian, but I think one of the greatest things about America
is that you can take a tai chi class at the Jewish Cultural Center
and go out for Indian food afterwards.
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 1:17AM|#
A Libertarian Case Against Open Borders
That's a 13-page essay. Can you summarize for us?
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 1:19AM|#
VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: No freedom without border patrol
That's fine. We can have some border control.
You know what would make it a lot easier to control the
Mexican-American border. Allowing a realistic number of Mexican
immigrants and guest workers to legally pass through the border
checkpoints.
|8.19.08 @ 1:28AM|#
Elites and libertarians are out to lunch when it comes to
immigration.
Not in the article, but case in point is neocon columnist Linda
Chavez. She writes one article after another about the benefits of
massive unskilled immigration from latin america. What she doesn't
tell her readers is that she sits on the Board of Directors of
ABM Industries a huge Janitorial firm which guess what???? I
repeat, this is not rocket science.
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 1:29AM|#
And by the way, William R, have you ever actually watched Spanish language TV? Are you aware of how many "learn to speak English" commercials they have?
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 1:31AM|#
If she's a neocon, then how is she relevant as an example of libertarian attitudes toward immigration?
|8.19.08 @ 2:39AM|#
She's part of the beltway elites. No where are elites more out of touch with average folks than on the issue of immigration. Benefits the few at the expense of the average Joe. Both political parties. Democrats for their ethnic pimp groups and Republican cheap labor big donors.
|8.19.08 @ 3:36AM|#
I agree that the "elites" are very out of touch with average
folks on immigration. But the idea that immigration on mass
benefits the few at expense of the average Joe is just wrong and
the elites realize this because they understand inflation numbers
and the value of cheap labor. I realize that a lot of people wish
we could limit the market to artificially raise prices and wages
but countries have porous borders and people are self interested
and many will move towards the most opportunity.
Besides I don't see what makes the average Joe any better then the
average Jose. All men were created equal and therefore no one
should be protected from economic competition on the basis of where
you're born.
|8.19.08 @ 4:41AM|#
i see the Rockwellian loonies have put on the
Sunday-go-to-meeting sheets and come for a ride.
Camp of the Saints was filed with flawed economic logic, bad
demographics and lots of racialist hysteria. I read it years ago
and was first taken with it. But the more I learned free market
economics the more clear it was that the author was ignorant of
basic economics.
I wish the Klan-lite types from Auburn would just stop pretending
they speak for libertarianism with their new revisionist kind of
libertarianism that compromises basic principles.
|8.19.08 @ 6:17AM|#
Ian | August 19, 2008, 3:36am |
Problem is, that labor might be cheap for employers, but not the
taxpayers. The elites fully understand this. With all the income
transfer mechanisms in place this cheap labor in reality is nothing
but taxpayer subsidized labor.
|8.19.08 @ 6:21AM|#
hlm | August 19, 2008, 4:41am
You don't have an argument. Throw out all the bogus racism bull
siht.
|8.19.08 @ 7:46AM|#
Shikha Dalmia we assimilated all the Irish why not the Mexicans. We'll last time I looked the Irish speak english
|8.19.08 @ 10:39AM|#
"That's a 13-page essay. Can you summarize for us?"
Really? Posters here have been referring to giant tomes of economic
wisdom for years.
Mike Laursen|8.19.08 @ 12:08PM|#
Really? Posters here have been referring to giant tomes of
economic wisdom for years.
I should have asked for an abstract rather than a summary. When one
links to some lengthy read here, it would be useful to give an idea
why others would want to invest their time reading it and the key
parts to which they should pay extra attention.
So, William R., can you provide an abstract of A Libertarian
Case Against Open Borders?
|8.19.08 @ 2:07PM|#
If you think that unrestricted immigration won,t affect your nation just ask th Native Amricans how it worked out for them.
bob|8.19.08 @ 5:14PM|#
Illegal immigration is costing American taxpayers at all
different levels of government at least a trillion dollars each
year.
In my part of Texas it is obvious the state is saving lots of
money, using them on road construction
I don't think we had an illegal alien problem in the U.S. until we
got labor laws that stopped the exploitation of citizens, thus the
wealthier need for cheap illegals.
bob|8.19.08 @ 5:14PM|#
I find it quite ignorant to think illegal's are using up what we
have in the U.S. a drive in and around most neighborhoods is clear
proof just look at the houses. Mansions that house two, that get
rich working illegal's, while they live 10 or more to a house. Open
borders would work if governments just enforced existing laws on
the working of illegal's, because they wouldn't have jobs. the
labor is only needed to make a few better off , so they can use up
more of what we have. But, of course then states would have to pay
more themselves for road construction and more.
But the idea that immigration on mass benefits the few at expense
of the average Joe is just wrong and the elites realize this
because they understand inflation numbers and the value of cheap
labor. I just have to laugh at this statement, are you benefitting
as an elite?
|8.20.08 @ 10:34AM|#
Even, if our Federal government continues to keep its head in
the sand, its our STATE and LOCAL governments Job to enforce our
LAWs and yes INCLUDING every AMERICAN citizen (ALL RACES) to keep
out Illegal Aliens from OUR Country.
Tell your Government you are tired and want them out and the
business that hire the illegals held accountable.
www.numbersusa.com and http://capwiz.com/proenglish/home/ and
www.capsweb.org
bob|8.20.08 @ 1:05PM|#
I hope you all realize all illegals are not hispanic, but from
every race, every border.
I am not against immigrants, only the illegals, allowed in to be
exploited by the few who prosper.
Just the opinion of a legal immigrant decendent, from only about 90
yrs.
|8.20.08 @ 1:31PM|#
I am not against immigrants, only the illegals, allowed in
to be exploited by the few who prosper.
Well then... Make every immigrant legal and you won't have anyone
to be against nor will they be exploited.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245