Good News for Many Immigrants and Most U.S. Businesses
Nick Gillespie | June 8, 2007, 7:59am
From NPR:
The chances that Congress will act on a comprehensive immigration bill this year have been dealt a possibly fatal blow in the Senate....
The measure was dubbed the "grand bargain" by its authors, who cobbled it together behind closed doors. It would have changed the way visas are issued from a system based on family ties to one based on merit. It also contained a guest worker provision, and new requirements for employers to verify the identities and legal status of their workers.
But critics from all sides assailed the measure as unworkable. Despite the optimism that it might yet be reconsidered, chances for the bill appear bleak.
More here.
As with virtually all immigration legislation, this was rotten stuff in that it would make the lives of people and businesses filled with bureaucracy and worse without faciliating anything positive. That said, it was probably politically about the best compromise politically available at the current moment.
The status quo--however awful it is--is probably better than the world that would have been created by this legislation. So, RIP.
Reason on immigration here.
Matt | June 8, 2007, 10:46am | #
Ken:
Sorry, new to reading comments here I haven't been following your postings. What threads? What studies? I guess I can look at them, once I know what they are, and see if they are legitimate and sound.
However, I would have to say your categories are a little hard to work with.
More superstitious? How do you define that, or the study after study that you have read? Personally I define religion as a superstition and we have pretty high polliing rates on believing in that. Although Mexico which is a predominately catholic country may be even higher than us. I can conceed you that but I don't see how it matters.
Higher rates of TB and other infections. Again, pretty broad. I will give you that one also but given the health care system in this country I think we can handle it. Handling it would be enhanced by ensuring that the illegals payed income taxes to help support federal and local systems. Further there are studies that indicate that pristene environments, from a bacteria stand-point, may not be all they are cracked up to be. The sterilization of our homes may lead our children to be more susceptible to allergies asthma and disease later as they do not build up strong immune systems early. Just a thought. Still I would say even if you have data to back up the higher infections rates it is really inconsiquential.
"corruption loving (well, I grant you here that I can only show the mother nation has high levels)"
While it is backed up by studies that Mexico does have a high level of corruption I doubt people love it, but I believe you are willing to agree with me on that.
"support of practices like cock-fighting"
Do you have a problem with cock-fighting or practices like cock-fighting? I believe cock-fighting is still legal in one state in the union and has only been outlawed in other states in the last decade or two. While there may be a higher percentage of people in Mexico that don't have a problem with cock-fighting I doubt that it is a threat to our way of life.
"gang membership and other crime related variables"
Again you start out strong but then throw in an incredibly vague catchall. Gang membership may indeed be higher amongst immigrants, illegal or otherwise. History shows that as a predictable pattern in the US. Given the way not so recent immigrants feel about recent immigrants...the new ones tend to band together and the less recent immigrants tend to view gatherings of people different from themselves as "gangs." I think it is a problem, but one that will work itself out over time. It isn't as if crime would disappear if there were no illegal immigrants.
So provide your studies if you want. My point is your points are broad, not well defined and not very important. They are just fear mongering in an attempt to justify a xenophobic position.
jh | June 8, 2007, 12:44pm | #
Ken, re: your comments: "Look, I see your point, a lot of opposition to Italian, or let's say my ancestors, Irish and German, immigration was plain old xenophobic racism.
But maybe some of it was warranted. I mean, the Irish brought some great things, but they also brought the Irish mob, of the Irish ethnic manipulation of politics in cities that has been a burden in the US for a long time.
I'm NOT saying the actions of these immigrant was not understandable, it most certainly was. But to pretend like the arguments against immigration in the past were all lunatic xenophobia is incorrect. The Irish, Italian and German immigrants brought real social drags, as well as social benefits, to the US. If the fomer outweight the latter then it was a bad thing...We need to ask ourselves that about current immigration."
As someone whose ancestors were Irish and German (and a lot of other nationalities as well), would you have me not exist because some Irish and German immigrants who were not my ancestors caused problems? Would you be OK with my Irish ancestors dying in the potato famine, or my German ancestors dying in Hitler's lovely Third Reich?
You get enough people immigrating, you're gonna get some troublemakers. You get a large enough sample of people whose ancestors came here many generations ago, you're gonna get some troublemakers. So, do we condemn people en masse for the actions of a few, or do we evaluate each person on their own behavior, and kick out just those immigrants who don't show a willingness to work hard and obey the law?
