97% of Illegal Aliens Take Jobs That Americans Want and Need

Tony Dolz/American Chronicle ^ | by Tony Dolz

[djf]

Agreed. "Doing the jobs Americans won't do".

Why the hell don't they just come out and call us lazy and stupid?

That's what they mean.

[Rick_Michael]

Not necessarily. The 3% is the agricultural jobs e.g fruit picking, which will essentially be done by robots in the near future. The machines are made, it's just a matter of getting them all out there at a fair market value.

[Rick_Michael]

I must note product demand as well in the Medical Industry.

Refer to previous post.

[supercat]

Not necessarily. The 3% is the agricultural jobs e.g fruit picking, which will essentially be done by robots in the near future. The machines are made, it's just a matter of getting them all out there at a fair market value.

The article didn't say 97% of employed illegal aliens. An illegal alien who is not employed is clearly not "doing a job Americans won't do". To be sure, the article doesn't say "97% of all illegal aliens", but rather "97% of [some group consisting of] 12 to 20 million illegal aliens", so depending upon what 12 to 20 million aliens are talking about their statistic might be true, but absent such a definition it is also meaningless.

[InterceptPoint]

Well of course supply and demand is still in play.

But if there is an increase in the demand for health care then health care prices will rise, people will pay the extra and they will have less money in their pocket to spend on housing. The price of housing will fall. Those two effects go counter to each other. You can't spend more money than you have - unless you have the Fed in the system. They print it. You spend it. That is the real source of inflation not the ups and downs of gasoline prices. If we didn't inflate the money supply the price of things other than gasoline would fall because there would be less of them consumed - that is the same as saying that there would be less demand for them. Monetary inflation is the only way that everything can increase in price which is what we actually experience. I agree that some things increase more than others due to greater demand.

[unseen]

large population of US citizens who speak Spanish as their first or second language

There's the rub. IMO if ENGLISH isn't your first language your not a citizen of the US. We are an English speaking country. The immigrants that came here in the early 1900's knew that to fit into the mainstream they HAD to learn ENGLISH. The liberal feel gooders thought that the hard work of learning ENGLISH was too much to ask for people that wanted to be citizens thus we have more costs to business, a fractured electorate, and two different and separate cultures. Over the history of the human race a country with two different cultures has massive internal strife and usually splinters into two different countries. Canada and Quebec come to mind. Because of the language barrier after hundreds of years Canada is still separated within its own country. Spain and Portugal is another example. Present day Iraq another, England and Scotland and Wales yet another. The spoken language is the glue that holds a country and people together. This is one reason that France is splintered with its immigrants also.

[unseen]

The government can raise the birth rate of US citizens by other means then importing poverty. They could increase the tax credit for one. A $3000/child tax credit and a increase of the EIC would increase birth rates of low income families. Outlawing abortion would also increase the birth rate. Cutting federal programs like food stamps and welfare would motivate people to work these jobs. The tax system is geared to a two child policy. the government could also give other incentives to keep couples together in marriage for longer periods of time. This would increase the population also because stable families tend to produce more wealth and more children they single mothers and fathers. No, your argument is just another flawed argument like jobs Americans won't do. If the government really cared about the economic problems facing this country they would not take the short way out by importing cheap labor. they would do what was needed to insure our country produced it's own children and it's own energy, it's own manufactured goods, etc. It seems like the answer in Washington to every problem is either imports or outsourcing.

[starbase]

These are jobs that Americans elitist politicans will not do.

Superbly stated BQ!!

[stopem]

AND they better watch what they call us we are VOTERS and we can say whether they can continue in their cushy jobs.

[texastoo]

These appear to be the latest stats I have seen. Thanks for posting this. Very informative.

[InterceptPoint]

The government can raise the birth rate of US citizens by other means then importing poverty.

Well you make some points but I think your expectations of what government can and should do probably exceed those of the average Freeper and certainly mine. Upping the birth takes time and then you wait 20 years for the first workers to arrive. Economic forces don't operate on that kind of time table.

I'm no big fan of immigration but I think we are beyond the time when we could do anything about it. And I mean 40 to 50 years beyond that time. Government has screwed up border control and all of the factors that you name for much too long a time. We now have the more simple choice of allowing illegals to stay or making the (I believe) draconian choice of rounding them up, kicking them out and restricting future immigration. The cost of the latter would be huge, the growth in government to manage it would be huge and the reduction in our standard of living would decline enough that we would all notice. The economic impact would last for decades. The growth in government would last forever. No thanks.

[Shuttle Shucker]

Interestingly enough, even Hillary kind of "gets it" where Mexico's nearly
omnipotent oligarchs are concerned:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/411104p-347791c.html

"[Mrs. Clinton] said she favors a "carrot-and-stick" approach with Mexico to
provide that government and its "oligarchs" the incentives to give Mexicans
more and better jobs in their own country."

Frankly, the more pressure we keep on Mexico, immigration-wise, the more
reformers inside of Mexico can be emboldened and empowered to scale back
monopolists' abuses down there which keep our own country flooded with
economic refugees. Here's an interesting thread on new legal reform progress
that finally
emerged in Mexico I think as a result of immigration reform's failure:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1611677/posts

We can make a difference for our sake, and their's as well, by cracking down
and demanding more activism by our own United States Trade Representative
against protectionist Mexican oligarchs in, for example, the monopolistic
petroleum, telecommunications, electricity and television media sectors.
Isn't prodding our neighbor to finally clean up its own backyard before
lambasting us for ours the neighborly thing to do?

[Rick_Michael]

I'm actually one of the few people (or not), that wishes to go back to the free-banking era...although that would involve a change in mental paradigms to get us there. No welfare, no SS,...nothing but Constitutional needs funded by indirect taxation e.g tariff, excise, etc.

When we actually knew the essence of freedom.

Fundamentally, I fear that many of these illegals favor socialism, and millions of them spell the end of liberty in America or Civil conflicts. I'd like to stick to our needs and do it much slower pace than we are doing it now. I guess we're past that stage in some regards, and I'm not one to think mass deportation would be done or should. I just don't think we should give in and bend-over--so to speak. There's many fantasy-minded socialists just waiting to destroy the one country that made an example for all.

[InterceptPoint]

I'm actually one of the few people (or not), that wishes to go back to the free-banking era...although that would involve a change in mental paradigms to get us there. No welfare, no SS,...nothing but Constitutional needs funded by indirect taxation e.g tariff, excise, etc.

A closet libertarian - right here on Free Republic. That makes at least two of us. I agree with you.

[unseen]

Where's this round up? Everyone's talking about. You do not need a round up to get rid of 11 million people. You control the border stopping the flow. You do maybe 100 IFCO raids. You send employers to jail. You cut benefits to illegals including free education for their kids and you stop the practice of giving citizenship to children born on American soil and start giving citizenship to children born of American citizens. You streamline the worker identification process and you deport any illegal that is picked up by local law enforcement for any reason. This does two things very quickly. It causes the illegals to not be able to provide for themselves or families and it causes companies to seriously thing about what they are doing when it comes to hiring. This will cause a immigration attrition and more illegals will go back on there own then what we could round up anyway. At the same time this is going on the government provides incentives like I mentioned to increase the population. In 10 to 20 years the problem is solved. Or we could do what you suggest and in 20 yrs we will have 100million illegal immigrants in this country and CA, AZ, NM, CO, TX would be part of the US in name only.

[InterceptPoint]

Where's this round up? Everyone's talking about. You do not need a round up to get rid of 11 million people. You control the border stopping the flow. You do maybe 100 IFCO raids. You send employers to jail. You cut benefits to illegals including free education for their kids and you stop the practice of giving citizenship to children born on American soil and start giving citizenship to children born of American citizens. ...

And along the way you create a country that most Americans would come to hate and a repressive, bureaucratic government with more power than I'm willing to give it. And the 12,000,000 illegals - they would become 12,000,000 felons. If 90% returned to Mexico you would still have over a million left and they would have little choice but to choose crime as their new career. No thank you.

There have been estimates of the cost of the program you've laid out - upwards of $100 billion. And that assumes that it would work which it wouldn't. So the cost would be like the cost of the War on Drugs. $75 billion a year forever.

[Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin]

"The distinguished Senators Kennedy, McCain, Specter, Brownback, DeWine, Martinez , Hagel and Graham" would be utterly humiliated if they had to do any of those jobs. I'm thinking that since they've convinced a few of us poor souls that they deserve the $160, 000(+, +, +, ?) they don't have to do anything other than laugh all the way to the bank...

[Rick_Michael]

"You do not need a round up to get rid of 11 million people. You control the border stopping the flow. You do maybe 100 IFCO raids."

It would be nice if the IRS got the owners/workers on tax evasion or on charges of stolen identities. If they can do it on Capone, I don't see how they couldn't do it on owners/workers....

I think I generally agree that first and foremost the border must be secured...MUST.

The raids could be done in limiting amounts throughout the nation. They should be well known, and big industry. It should hit the newsstand daily to get an effect.

Then finally: we have to force Mexico into reforming it's country. All the political pressure we can muster in actually making that a place where people feel safe to invest into...rather than staying the hell-hole it is currently.

That would be nice.

[unseen]

yes as an added benefit to reforming Mexico into a capitalistic country would be to mute the sway of Chavez in Latin America. If capitalism where able to raise the standard of living for Mexico's poor then there could be another revolution throughout that region giving the US a secure southern border.