Legalize illegal immigration, YES or NO

[Stefan Zota]

Originally Posted by bigbadwolf Ceteris Paribus (i.e., other things equal) employers would prefer an American. But if, say, an American programmer costs $80,000 and an Indian programmer, say, $45,000, then that affects the calculation. Furthermore, if you have enough, say, Indian programmers then the American programmer will have to reduce his expectations to, say, $60,000. This is exactly the kind of "flexible workforce" capital wants; it's the reason why Bill Gates and Michael Dell scurry to DC to testify before senate committees on why H1B quotas should be kept high. The proponents of unlimited influx like to portray it as a process where everyone wins. Or in the case of Thomas Friedman, where American labor will have to become more "competitive" and "flexible" to compete in a "global marketplace," which is portrayed as something inevitable. But it appears not everyone wins. Foreign workers win something (otherwise they wouldn't bother); capital wins; but it looks like local labor loses.

I am not a proponent of unlimited influx. I was saying that a process for skilled immigration is required. Simply granting visas to everyone getting a certain degree will be arbitrary and it won't work.

Overall, at the global economy, I agree with you that it is a balance induced by this "extra skilled" workforce. This keeps a cap on the salary. However your logic with Indian vs American programmer doesn't really apply for all jobs. Big banks have pretty strict levels of pay for junior employees. If that is 80k, then that is all. You cannot say: well I am an immigrant so I will do the job for 40k.
There is not a lot to negotiate. If they want you, they cannot pay half.

[atreides]

Now that Arizona has drawn first blood, maybe the house and senate can get their act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform

[bigbadwolf]

Originally Posted by atreides Now that Arizona has drawn first blood, maybe the house and senate can get their act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform

What Arizona has done is interesting in a broader context. The Federal government has only had responsibility for immigration since the 1890s -- thanks to a Supreme Court ruling. Arizona is reasserting states' rights. In southern Arizona, even before this new law, one had to carry one's permission to be in the US (passport with stamped visa or Green Card) in case one got pulled over and questioned. Arizona, Texas and maybe southern California are the place where illegal migrants cross over and the Federal authorities have little effective control over it. If the Feds can't do their job, why not delegate some of it to the states?

[bigbadwolf]

Interesting essay at Pat Buchanan's blog:

http://buchanan.org/blog/the-other-i...ion-issue-3987

Massive legal immigration undercuts the wages of American workers and causes unemployment. Of the 1.1 million new green cards we issued last year, 808,478 were to working age immigrants. During this same time period, over five million Americans lost their jobs. With these numbers, there are no jobs Americans won’t do. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American citizens’ wages go down 3-4 percent for every 10 percent increase of foreign workers—legal or illegal.

[IlyaKEightSix]

That stated, what's the answer? To stop immigration? Screw that! I'm an immigrant, too. I just feel that due to the global economy that immigration run par with employment. If there's high unemployment, we can't let as many people in as when there is low unemployment, otherwise so many more people suffer.

[Stefan Zota]

Originally Posted by bigbadwolf Interesting essay at Pat Buchanan's blog: http://buchanan.org/blog/the-other-i...ion-issue-3987

The article is biased, conclusion is wrong in my opinion, however it has some good points. The core of the issue is:

From 2000-2009, we issued over 10 million green cards, the highest decade of American history. Currently, there are 38 million immigrants, 24 million of whom are in the workforce. This does not include temporary workers. DHS did not release the 2009 figures yet, but they issued 912,735 temporary employment authorizations in 2008. Most of these immigrants are low skilled and from the Third World. Less than 10 percent of new green card holders are from Europe. People of extraordinary ability, investors, and immigrants with advanced degrees made up less than 8 percent of the new immigrants. Faced with these numbers, how can anyone argue with a straight face that we don’t admit enough immigrants?

If the goal is to select only the best, why were 92% low-skilled people approved for green-card? By penalizing 100%, you are baring the access for the 8%. These guys really made the difference in the past and I cannot see how U.S. can afford to drive them away.
It goes back to my initial argument regarding structure of the immigration process ...

[bigbadwolf]

Another point of view from Shamus Cooke:

Because of the economic crisis, massive unemployment, corporate bailouts, home foreclosures, and criminal activity of Wall Street, the majority of people in the U.S. have never been as passionately anti-corporation. But the corporate owned media plus the wealthy, elite-controlled Congress reacted quickly to these intolerable circumstances and fought back. They took the fight over public opinion to the airwaves, and massively pushed the blame for the dismal state of the U.S. economy onto those unable to defend themselves — immigrants. One can either focus their political rage on the billionaires who dominate the economy and Congress —Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, etc. — or those millions of undocumented immigrants, many who get paid lower than minimum wage and are living in society’s shadows. The corporate media would rather you focus on immigrants. Thus, Fox News and virtually all other media outlets spew nightly venom at a vulnerable public, looking to get revenge on immigrants who “ruined America.” There is an obvious connection to this type of racist propaganda and the increase in hate crimes against Latinos that has exploded over the years. ...Obama and the Democrats have again betrayed another key constituency. Their shift to the right is the outcome of a crumbling economy that cannot be corrected without directly confronting the gigantic wealth and power of U.S. corporations. These corporations control the Democratic Party, who can only respond by the same immigrant scapegoating that the Republicans advocate. To shield themselves from popular anger, the U.S. corporate elite is promoting the most right-wing ideas to millions of people, so that social passions can be channeled towards society’s victims: immigrants, minorities, homosexuals, women who choose to get an abortion, etc. Workers organized in unions are also being targeted.

I suspect both points of view are correct.

[Andy Nguyen]

Immigration reform is not going to happen this year.

[IlyaKEightSix]

Even the most blatant exaggerations are built upon some kernel(s) of truth. And the fact is that when there are few jobs to go around, the last thing we want is more people coming into the country to compete with those who already are looking for employment.

And frankly, attacking the people who are different is nothing new. As for the banksters controlling the economy, what else is new? Everyone gets funded by someone who isn't the common people, because the common people don't have money to give.

So whether it's big oil on the right, or big banks and the hedgies on the left, it's a case of the lesser of N evils at any point in time, N being two in this case. I guess you can say that the hedgies are on the side of the common man if they're like George Soros and Jim Simons, but those two seem to be the exception, not the rule.

Either way, the one thing that doesn't change about the USA is the free for all nature of the system, for better or for worse.

[bigbadwolf]

Originally Posted by Stefan Zota If the goal is to select only the best, why were 92% low-skilled people approved for green-card? By penalizing 100%, you are baring the access for the 8%. These guys really made the difference in the past and I cannot see how U.S. can afford to drive them away. It goes back to my initial argument regarding structure of the immigration process ...

Is there an explicit goal to attract only the best? Or is it just more froth coming from corporate shills and cheerleaders who want larger number of immigrants and will use any disingenuous argument at hand?

I don't think the US will ever turn away the 8% -- regardless of what populist voices urge.

[Stefan Zota]

Originally Posted by bigbadwolf Is there an explicit goal to attract only the best? Or is it just more froth coming from corporate shills and cheerleaders who want larger number of immigrants and will use any disingenuous argument at hand?

It's a corporate and academic goal as well. If the country wants to be competitive in technical fields and the domestic supply is limited, then you have to look outside the borders. That should be the whole idea behind the green-card process.

Originally Posted by bigbadwolf I don't think the US will ever turn away the 8% -- regardless of what populist voices urge.

Never say never. If there are enough road-blocks, then skilled immigrants will be driven away slowly ...

[bigbadwolf]

Originally Posted by Stefan Zota It's a corporate and academic goal as well. If the country wants to be competitive in technical fields and the domestic supply is limited, then you have to look outside the borders. That should be the whole idea behind the green-card process.

But see, this is where it gets interesting. People like Bill Gates argue that the competitiveness of their companies -- and by implication that of the US economy -- depends on upping the number of skilled migrant workers allowed in. And this because there aren't enough available indigenously (so the argument goes). But the stats reveal another story. Thus, a few years back, unemployment among 50-year-old US computer programmers was 20% (it must surely be higher now). It would appear that there is local talent around -- but capital doesn't want to pay the going rate and works incessantly to undercut it. The history of immigration to the US seems to be largely (if not completely) about capital trying to undercut the wages and benefits of domestically available labor by importing cheaper immigrants. This side of the argument tends not to be heard in corporate-controlled mass media. And those who voice it are promptly dubbed "racist."

The argument with regard to skilled labor is analogous to the one used for unskilled labor. Thus the farm lobby argues that it can't find labor and so must import Mexicans. The disingenuous (but unstated) part of the argument is they can't find domestic labor because they're only willing to pay $4-$5 an hour for 12-hour backbreaking work in stifling heat and in an environment replete with pesticides. If they provided a living wage and better working conditions, they would have domestic applicants. Regardless of skilled or unskilled, capital wants cheaper and cheaper labor.

[Andy Nguyen]

Student’s Arrest Tests Immigration Policy - NYTimes.com

ATLANTA — Jessica Colotl, a 21-year-old college student and illegal Mexican immigrant was arrested in March for driving without a license and could face deportation next year.
“I never thought that I’d be caught up in this messed-up system,” Ms. Colotl said Friday at a news conference after being released on $2,500 bail. “I was treated like a criminal, like a threat to the nation.”

She and her lawyer declined to discuss the immigration status of her parents.

Civil rights groups say Ms. Colotl should be spared deportation because she was brought to the United States without legal documents by her parents at age 11. They also note that she has excelled academically and was discovered to be here illegally only after a routine traffic violation.
Supporters of immigration laws and the sheriff’s office in Cobb County say she violated state law, misled the police about her address and should not receive special treatment for her age or education.


No exception should be made, however admirable the offender, said Phil Kent, a spokesman for Americans for Immigration Control, a national group opposed to illegal immigration.
“Ironically, she says she wants to go on to law school, but she’s undermining the law,” Mr. Kent said. “What’s the point of educating an illegal immigrant in a system where she can’t hold a job legally or get a driver’s license?”

[IlyaKEightSix]

The law is the law, and no matter how stupid it is, if you break it, you face the consequences, if you are caught.

Also, I wholeheartedly agree with BBW's post. The reason I chose not to major in CS is that A) so many jobs were being outsourced to India/China, and B) so many immigrants coming in to do just that. However, there is no dearth of technical talent here back in the states. In fact, I simply believe that if the American government wants America to prosper in the leading edges of innovation, just mandate all graduate schools to only admit American citizens. They might be private institutions, but are still bound by American laws.

[bigbadwolf]

Originally Posted by IlyaKEightSix The law is the law, and no matter how stupid it is, if you break it, you face the consequences, if you are caught.

It depends on you are. We live in a plutocracy (masquerading as a democracy). If you're enough of a big fish, you get a slap on the wrist (at most) for flagrantly violating the laws. There's a set of laws that applies to the majority of the population. And another set -- or rather no set -- that applies to those at the pinnacle.

Also, I wholeheartedly agree with BBW's post. The reason I chose not to major in CS is that A) so many jobs were being outsourced to India/China, and B) so many immigrants coming in to do just that. However, there is no dearth of technical talent here back in the states. In fact, I simply believe that if the American government wants America to prosper in the leading edges of innovation, just mandate all graduate schools to only admit American citizens. They might be private institutions, but are still bound by American laws.

Which "America?" If it's the America of the rich and powerful, they're happy with mass immigration. Keeps the locals in line, and allows wage to converge (pointwise if not uniformly) to subsistence levels. It achieves wonders for the bottom line and has private coffers overflowing. If it's the other "America" -- that of the average fellow in the street -- then immigration is mostly bad news. But the USA is a plutocracy and politicians are marionettes of corporate overlords.

[Stefan Zota]

Debate continued by Los Angeles ...
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64B64S20100512

[Andy Nguyen]

Judge Blocks Parts of Arizona’s Immigration Law - NYTimes.com

What do you think about Arizona immigration rule? What should be done to discourage illegal immigration while encourage legal, H1-B immigration?
Can we achieve both?

[sjain]

Although I don't have an opinion on this but I know a lot of my friends with masters and phds from top colleges are struggling with their residency in U.S and a bunch of them had to find jobs elsewhere. So it doesn't seem fair to them.. I think immigration needs a complete reform. An interesting article proposes an improvement - Charles E. Schumer and Lindsey O. Graham - The right way to mend immigration - washingtonpost.com

[Anthony DeAngelis]

The US has a right to decide how many people come into this country. Every nation on this planet (including Mexico) has laws regulating immigration. No one is against LEGAL immigration. People here illegally are breaking the law. Yes, it is sad because many are just coming here to find a better life for their family, but we cannot allow people to come here without going through a normal process. If anything it insults the millions of people who have come here through the long and arduous process of legally gaining citizenship.

Furthermore, illegal immigration hurts recent immigrants and poor individuals the most. Educated and white collar workers are not losing their jobs because of illegals. The people with very little education or work experience are the ones losing good paying construction or labor jobs because of undocumented illegals willing to work under the table for very little. Unfortunately the politicians have made this issue out to be a racist attack against human rights and Mexican American citizens which it is not.