Supporters of immigration "reform" (including the president himself) rationalize their toothless approach to America's illegal influx by arguing that unskilled and low-skilled immigrants are an important and even necessary piece of the economic puzzle because "they do the work that Americans don't want to do."
This contention is insulting and downright erroneous on a number of levels. In economically depressed states like West Virginia, for example, citizens hungry for a job would be more than happy to hang drywall or pick crops for between $10-15 an hour.
But that's not really the issue. It's not that Americans won't do the work, it's that developers and big agricultural operations would rather empoly illegal labor. Paying an illegal immigrant $10-15 an hour while avoiding payroll taxes and social security contributions will ALWAYS be cheaper than paying an American worker $8 an hour legally.
Until Democrats stop vote grubbing and certain Sunbelt Republicans stop kowtowing to suburban developers, there will be no meaningful enforcement of the rule of law or just punishment of business leaders who are more interested in maximizing profit than in giving their own countrymen and women a fair shake.
2 comments:
That is the the real shame in this whole situation is that it did become politically polarizing. What is more a shame is the overall ignorance of the American people as they have stated their opinions throughout the past 3 weeks. I guess that is what makes this country great. We are all entitled to our opinion regardless of evidence. The fact of the matter is this is an issue that is deeper than just Republicans and Democrats, and will continue to pose a threat not only to our economy but our national security.
perhaps one point wasn't articlated in the original post.
american workers tend to spend their earnings at home or the u.s. immigrants send their money home to be spent or to enable others to enter our borders.
they also don't bolster the economy by purchasing durable goods (when is the last time you have seem an immigrant alone in a carr?) nor by renting or buying real estate with a reasonable number of inhabitants.
having a baby here is the ticket to relative wealth for the entire family. out government is worried about its infant citizen enough to ensure the whole household is healthy and happy.
perhaps the worst offenders are people like me, who hire immigrant cleaning people, the check cashing services who don't expect an i.d. but charge outrageous fees or the furniture/electronic rental places that charge 2% of more per month for cheap, used merchandise. watch one of their commercials, all of the clientele is white and appear affluent.
just try to emigrate to australia or other english-speaking country, no way if you are over 40 or don't have a skill they have to have and your social security equivalent is greatly reduced and you must revoke u.s. citizenship.
how about a "citizen's first" initiative. the employer must meaningfully recruit citizens for positions paying the market value. only if no citizen applies for the job can an immigrant apply. educational initatives could be enacted that train the majority of people who go to college that shouldn't in a trade which reduces the overall governmental burden.
how about a surcharge on the employer of an amount equivalent to what is being paid to an immigrant to be deposited in the social security coffer for u.s. citizens? there are tons constitutional and legal arguments (i.e. takings) against it but makes economic and ethical sense.
who takes care of the disabled or elderly immigrants? like we did before FDR, the family and its social structure. not that these persons will forego free medical treatment and handouts but it may cut down social security.
Post a Comment