Replace “immigration” with legal indentured servitude. Let anyone willing to pay their way in – by a lump sum payment or on an installment contract that has deportation as the penalty for non-payment come on in with photo identity documents and reporting requirements. No one to be left in the shadows. Set the cost of entry high enough to avoid allowing in deadwood. The cost should be at least $5000 – or maybe $10,000 or $15,000. That way the money paid to enter the United States will go into the federal treasury, instead of into the pockets of “coyotes” who run illegal immigration mills for sweat shops. If we cannot stop the flow of those seeking a better life, lets control that flow and make that inflow of would-be American citizens a source of revenue, well ordered, and free of exploitation.
there was a brilliant haox last year during the Wharton School’s conference on economic development in Africa. Two guys, believed by the conference organizers to be from the WTO, gave a full presentaton plugging “Compassionate Slavery” in Africa. The interesting thing, to me, was that the audience was reported to be completely respectful/docile. Not one challenge was raised. People’s willingness to take such ideas seriously makes one pause…
<
p>
As to Amber’s suggestion, and in all sincerity: I’m all for formalizing our shadowy, informal economy in prostitution and labor. I think seriously introducing the idea of indentured servitude might wake some people up to what is really going on. On the other hand, given the Wharton performance and the general inclination of people in this country to take personal decision making out of the hands of minorities, I’d be afraid that your offer might get taken up with too much enthusiasm.
Isn’t there something in the Constitution about a $10 maximum head tax? That was supposed to keep slave imports affordable, I think, but it probably applies to indentured servants as well. Back then they didn’t want to make it too difficult for new people to come here. It’s different now, I guess.
Jonathan Swift would be proud.
<
p>
You do raise an important point, however. The people in question do not come here, for the most part, as criminals or leaches. They sincerely wish to better their lives and provide for their families.
<
p>
But that’s only one side of the story. The other side is that we need them. Our economy depends on them. They are productive and contributing members of our society.
<
p>
So, it’s as much that we beg them to be here as that they eagerly seek opportunity. With that in mind, it’s very two-faced of us (as a society) to demonize and victimize them. The recent spectacle in New Bedford makes my blood boil.
<
p>
Let’s give these people the recognition they deserve, give them a decent opportunity to live free of fear, and provide a road to citizenship. We need them as much as they need us.
Michael, you are so progressive that it shocks me that you have no problem with this so called immigration issue. You see nothing wrong with the current system that makes poor people pay their life savings to smugglers who treat them like cattle? You see no problem with them working in sub-human conditions being paid far below a liveable wage?
<
p>
You paint the current system as part of the American Dream when it more reflects the worst stain in the histroy of our country–slavery. They certainly are victims. But the victimization starts long before raids like this. It is institutional victimization which you apparently condone.
<
p>
Well this progressive/liberal can not condone this mordern day version of “compassionate slavery”.
Please reread my comment. Where do you find support for the current system?
…but your writings seem to accept the other aspects of the current system. How else can one interpret your words:
<
p>
<
p>
I realize I omitted parts of your text, but I think I still maintained the full context of your point.
<
p>
Except for the raid, you seem to approve of the symbiotic relationship that is in place. Poor people who want to better their lives are subject to near slavery conditions (many smuggled in box cars, dumped in the middle of deserts) and exploited with sub par wages and poor work conditions. They have no recourse against this treatment because of their status.
<
p>
I can’t tolerate a system like this. I don’t “need them” so I can save a few bucks in choosing a landscaper or to get my house cleaned. As for “need(ing) them as much as they need us”…given that the over all impact of the wage structure of undocumented workers is to lower the overall wages in the country (certainly in a number of service and manufacturing related industries), I’m not sure how much more of this we need.
<
p>
Who benefits from this system of exploitation? The US business sector and affluent US consumers–not being squeezed by falling (real) wages. Sure the second generation of these workers may benefit, but that is questionable in a society that perpetuates such an exploitive system and continuely shifts retirement and health care costs on to the shoulders of people who can’t afford it..
<
p>
No, from top to bottom this system is broken, not just the last step in the system which is the arrest and deportation of these workers. I certainly agree with you, they are victimized. But they were victimized long before they get arrested and deported.
<
p>
How do you know that ? The business owners (New Bedford) claim all wage and hour laws were complied with.
at face value is as silly as you say Frank’s claim is. Like PP saying elsewhere that Finneran said XY & Z on WRKO, so it must be true! LOL!
I said Finneran broadcast an innaccuracy. And since more than one commenter referred to it, perhaps you will spare yourself the pain of having to listen to WRKO, and scknowledge that it was said, however erroneously.
<
p>
My POINT in mentioning it is that apparently Boston Media still hasn’t noticed that New Bedford isn’t part of the 10th Cong. Dist. – and they would notice a single STREET changed in Southie!
that the error was actually said on WRKO. It is an interesting irony that Finneran of all people should make such a mistake, is it not? He barely qualifies as Boston Media, being so fresh to the air waves. One would think he knew his way around a districting map by now…
I trust people ’til I don’t.
<
p>
The business owners claim all wage and hour laws were adherred to. Who said they weren’t ? Simple question for FrankS.
…and meant to discribe the general mistreatment of immigrants. My basic point is to oppose the entire system of immigration–but not from a right, rather from the left. We have a bad system and it needs to be addressed.
You impute a lot about my values (incorrectly) from some facts I cited and observations I made.
<
p>
I do not approve of the way undocumented workers and their families are treated in this country. But what is your solution?
<
p>
I believe we should document all people who are working in this country and provide a means for them to attain citizenship. We should treat everyone, citizens and non-citizens alike, with the respect and dignity they deserve. I see no need to have a shadow community of workers, exploited or not. It’s just not humane.
about immigration. While you and I have disagreed on various subjects, I hope you view me as a liberal/progressive and there is no question that you are alos one. I do apologize for impuning your values. I’m taking out my general frustration with liberals defending an economic system that I think is indefensible on you.
<
p>
It only helps the corporate interests. Sure the McCain/Kennedy bill is a start…but really a band-aid. I’m not an expert on the issue, and some of my other feelings are not well researched–but we have to stop the human trafficing at the border and if that means a few billion dollars more on border security to stop it, then lets do it. (No fence…this is America and not East Germany in the Cold War.) Increase legal immigration…sure.
<
p>
But to say this is how it is, is not right.
You come close to describing the circumstances that brought my father here. My grandmother had a cousin in Minneapolis as a sponsor, and she waited in Saskatchewan (where she worked as a missionary among the Indians) for an opening here. She had to demonstrate she had a job waiting (as a cook), a sponsor, and a financial bond to guarantee the expense of her citizenship. She (a widow) was self supporting from the day she arrived. My family’s greatest horror was to ‘be on the dole’ in any way, and they never were.
<
p>
I feel badly for people who want to come here now, with the path to citizenship blocked by the brick wall of our 1974 immigration bill. Really, do we STILL need Ted Kennedy’s extra quota for the Irish due to their depressed economy? Overhaul of the law is long overdue, and a sponsor/work system like you describe is workable and fair.
Let’s play analogies!
<
p>
Indentured servitude is to slavery as surge is to escalation.
I was listening to MLK explain the origin of segregation: after slavery ended, the land owners wanted to keep the wages very low, since it used to be free. So they paid white workers very low wages, based on the threat to fire and replace them with even cheaper former-slave black labor. So along came the Progressive Movement which united black and white against the land owners. So the land owners started jim crow and segregation to stop the Progressives — and keep the wages very low. When the whites were starving, they “ate jim crow” — they knew that there were at least white, and better than black. This served to stop blacks and white from uniting and getting living wages.
<
p>
Today I see similarities between Dr. King’s discussion, and what is happening with illegal immigrants.
<
p>
The people in New Bedfored were expoited. No amount of ‘living wage’ legislation would have touched them, as they WERE illegal. And those who qualify for the living wage would be forced to move away as invivibles do the work.
<
p>
I resent this chatter about how they do the jobs nobody elso wants. CRAP! They do the job nobody else wants at $4 per hour! For $10? Different story!
More tomorrow.
Merger of three countries.
SPPNA,Amero,Nascocorridor
http://www.spp.gov
Hell, let’s just demand implantable 666 Mark of the Beast Satanic microchips for all “free” and “equal” “citizens” of the US/NAU.
Cindy Sheehan was “free” until she was carted off during a speech on the virtues of spreading “freedom”. For wearing a T-shirt no less. Yet now the election is over and media has no further use for her.