Posted on 01/13/2004 4:47:35 PM PST by lonewacko_dot_com
[Unfortunately, the full text of this article is not available online. You need to either click the link above and pay $5.95, or go to your local library and look for 80 Foreign Affairs No. 6, November/December 2001. I've excerpted some of the more interesting parts of the article below.]
The only problem with this "win-win" scenario is that it will not work. Bush's proposal [the 2001 proposal --LW] ignores the fact that virtually no low-wage "temporary worker" program in a high-wage liberal democracy has ever turned out to be genuinely temporary. On the contrary, most initially small (and often "emergency") temporary worker programs have grown much larger, and lasted far longer, than originally promised.
...guest worker programs are virtual recipes for mutual dependence between employers and the migrants who work for them. Employers naturally grow to depend on the supply of low-wage and compliant labor, relaxing their domestic recruitment efforts and adjusting their production methods to take advantage of the cheap labor. History has shown that in agriculture (where many Mexican guest workers would be employed), a pool of cheap workers gives farm owners strong incentives to expand the planting of labor-intensive crops rather than invest in mechanized labor-saving equipment and the crops suitable for it...
...political leaders have often belatedly discovered that admitting temporary low-wage workers unnaturally sustains industries with low productivity and wages, such as garment manufacturing, labor-intensive agriculture, and domestic services. In consequence, the economy's overall productivity and growth suffer...
Proponents of a new Mexico-U.S. often portray it as a legal and humane alternative to what has become a huge problem - the unauthorized mass migration of Mexicans to the United States. Such advocates seem blind, however, to the unequivocal lessons of history. Far from mitigating illegal immigration, the two countries' last major temporary worker program actually initiated and accelerated its flow. During the so-called bracero ("strong-armed one") program from 1942 to 1964, the number of unauthorized Mexicans slipping across the border actually expanded in parallel with the number of authorized temporary workers; the illegal flows then continued to accelerate after the program's termination... Today, scholars largely agree that the 22 years of bracero employment created the conditions for the subsequent boom of unauthorized Mexican migration...
...California Farmer reported in 1963 that if the flow of braceros stopped, tomato growers and canners "agree the State will never [again be able to plant] the 100,000 to 175,000 acres planted when there was a guaranteed supplemental labor force in the form of the braceros..."
Reality, however, never confirmed these dire predictions. In 1960 some 45,000 farm workers (mostly braceros) had harvested 2.2 million tons of processing tomatoes. By 1999, it took only 5,000 workers to operate machinery that harvested some 12 million tons. Thanks to these efficiency gains from mechanization, the real price of processing tomatoes declined 54 percent while per capita consumption rose 23 percent...
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignaffairs.org ...
I don't buy this at all. The guest worker program applied on the East Coast as well as the West. East Coast workers were primarily from island nations like Jamaica, Barbados, Haiti, etc. They were seasonal workers, they didn't bring their families, and much of the money they earned wasn't given to them until they arrived back in their native country.
Companies that supplied the seasonal workers did well if they went by the rules. The people who hired seasonal workers used these companies, because they were shielded from any immigration problems by the companies.
The reason these programs were ended is because Liberals thought the workers weren't living well enough. They mostly lived in camps - some were better than others - but the employers were reluctant to build much better quarters for a crew that would live there about 1 month/yr.
Aka: a third world country.
Before you vote for Bush, you should ask yourself these questions.
If slavery of blacks is wrong then why is slave labor of Mexicans and other nationalities and ethnic groups not wrong?
If the minimum wage and child labor laws are humane for American citizens, why are they not humane for Mexicans and other nationalities and ethnic groups?
And why should an illegal be awarded jobs over proven law-abiding citizens?
Should Bush's interest and the nation's interest be to give our money, health-care, protection, and other resources to a people who have no interest or value in our nation's survival or sovereignty?
Is such a President upholding his oath of office to serve and protect America's interests and people?
Is such a person fit to lead our country and hold our country's most powerful position?
Is such a person fit to hold the most powerful position in the world?
Yes. This is the obvious plan. The elimination of the middle class will give the globalists and the socialists the tyrannical power they long to exert. If this plan goes through, America will be a third world, socialist, globalist country in very short order. America will have no sovereignty.
The indoctrination is already established through the public schools, the media, and the welfare state. The public schools do not teach our children right and wrong or the realities of business and economy in the real world. The public schools with diversity teach perversity and are nothing more than socialist indoctrination camps. The public schools teach children not independent through strong Judeo-Christian values and a good work ethic but perversity and lazy dependence on government money. The children are taught they are entitled to socialism not freedom.
Of course not. Any company that doesn't use the cheapest method of production that it can is going to be out of business very soon.
In countries where labor is cheap, goods will be produced by humans; in countries where labor is expensive, goods will be produced by machines.
The trade-off is whether to use machines in the US or workers in Mexico. There never will be high paid workers in the US doing these jobs.
I think there is a lot of benefit by helping the Mexican economy and letting their people do these jobs.
Exactly. How many human bodies do you see harvesting wheat? Corn? Somehow Kansas et. al. have figured out how to harvest without illegals because they had to. And wheat and corn are CHEAP. For that matter, the cotton that the cheap labor (i.e. slaves) kept low in price is - guess what - still low in price. According to the pro-illegal crowd, it should be expensive.
Not only that, but a huge ever-expanding pool of cheap illegals GUARANTEES wages to remain low. Apparently the libs haven't figured that out yet.
| *During the so-called bracero ("strong-armed one") program from 1942 to 1964, the number of unauthorized Mexicans slipping across the border actually expanded in parallel with the number of authorized temporary workers; the illegal flows then continued to accelerate after the program's termination... **I don't buy this at all. The guest worker program applied on the East Coast as well as the West. East Coast workers were primarily from island nations like Jamaica, Barbados, Haiti, etc.
|
I wonder what they'll call the geographic area now known as the USA?
Maybe "FTA Zone 2", if they number the FTA ex-countries from top to bottom starting with Canada.
Were you aware that most of our borders are on the ocean? Have you ever heard of a thing called a "boat"? Have you ever heard that Cubans and Haitians come to FL in rafts, boats, or anything else that might float for even a short time?
Nah, I didn't think so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.