ERASING AMERICA'S BORDERS....(Expo)sing the Truth on Illegal Immigration and Free Trade

Sierra Times ^ | 01. 21. 05 | Nathan Victor

[chronic_loser]

Quite possibly the most stupid and surface analysis of an issue I have ever had the displeasure of reading. A couple of points in rebuttal:

1) Common markets ONLY lead to centralization when the countries involved are socialist leaning in the first place. Using Europe as an example of "what happens when you try to have common markets" is so mindless that it hurts my brain just trying to sink down and answer such a cretin proposition.

2) On the same basic topic, but on a different slant, is the assertion that common markets erode individual sovereignty. They most assuredly do NOT. The fact that you have a bunch of prissy rulemakers in Belgium intent on regulating the size of a pint of beer in England is NOT a comment on the nature of markets. It is a comment on how the method for fixing sick and crippled markets is not to simply make them bigger. You just get BIG sick and crippled markets that way. The trick is to make them free, not big. Erosion of sovereignty comes as bureaucrats feel compelled to twiddle with legislating the "rules" surrounding trade.

3) The cause for our immigration problems have nothing to do with FREE markets. Rather, we have chosen to adopt anti market strategies to deal with our social problems (poverty, retirement, medical costs, product and workplace safety, etc). The problem is, laws of the market cannot be legislated away, no matter how well intentioned the programs legislated to do so. Invariably, other market forces come into conflict with them, as they have here. We NEED entry level labor, due to a growing economy and a declining birthrate. However, we are afraid that allowing workers in legally would add to the list of those entitled to our socialistic programs (welfare, unemployment, medicaid, etc), so we leave our borders open to get them in, but refuse to give them status. This is hypocritical, exploitative, non-thinking, and produces three REALLY bad results. One, it makes a porous border so that instead of a stream, we have an overwhelming flood. Two, because it is risky to get in, people stay rather than do what they would normally do, which is rotate (I know several contractors who used to work here from March to November and return to Mexico to be with family. They did that on a yearly basis, but now stay because they are afraid they won't be able to return). Three, it produces resentment from many who see the strain placed on our system and "play by the rules." For a great analysis, see the CATO institute's paper on guest labor programs in the past.

4) The answer is NOT to slam shut the border, deport the illegals, and create an army of bureaucrats to hunt down and fine businesses who hire illegals. You think that will fix the problem? Look at Japan. There is a GREAT example of a protected economy. They adopt most of the xenophobe proposals of the anti immigrant crowd here on Free Republic. Rather it produces more of what already ails us, artificially high labor rates (hint: labor rates are different from wage scales), ossified systems of regulatory compliance, stratified social classes, and an inability to respond, even when the system is collapsing for need of innovation (read: "banking system in Japan")

Immigration and free (common) markets are two different, although related, topics. This article is yellow journalism, attempting to rouse the already frothing bigots (and God knows there are more than a few on Free Republic!) in the hopes of getting some other folks to see all the hoopla and hop on and say "see, it didn't work in Europe...., maybe Pat Buchanan is right after all!"

Finally, for those hapless xenophobes who hate what I am saying but can't string enough firing neurons together to do anything other than attack a handle ("chronic_loser"), just pretend the handle reads "flamebait for the neurally vacant" and respond accordingly.

[Mr. Mojo]

1) Common markets ONLY lead to centralization when the countries involved are socialist leaning in the first place.

And Canada isn't socialist-leaning? How about the nations in central and So. America? Not exactly free-market havens, to be sure.

......we are afraid that allowing workers in legally would add to the list of those entitled to our socialistic programs

Afraid? First of all, the U.S. gov't loves adding dependents to the "entitlement" list. That's where they derive their power. And secondly, illegals get (most of) the welfare benefits of those with legal status anyway, and that more than anything else encouages the flood through our porous borders.

The answer is NOT to slam shut the borders, deport the illegals....

Since there could very well be nearly 20 million illegals already here, deportation is a near impossibility. You're right, it's not going to happen. Deportation of illegal criminal/gang elements, however, should be undertaken to the best of our ability and with extreme vigilance. (Currently there are over 600,000 illegals incarcerated in the U.S., costing taxpayers $1.6 billion annually).

Getting rid of the welfare/entitlement state would indeed go a long way to slowing down the hordes, but alas that looks like it'll happen when pigs fly. So the mass illegal migration will continue unabated.

You failed to mention a key (and relatively new) component here -- terrorist elements that seek to enter the U.S for the sole purpose of destroying us. Giving the welfare state the axe will do little if anything to dissaude jihadists from attempting to carry out their mission. We have to fight this war on many fronts -- a PR battle for "hearts and minds" (probably futile, but worth the effort), a military battle to kill as many of the nutballs as possible while encouraging freedom movements in the nations from which their radical ideology was disseminated, and physical control of our own borders. Unfortunately, we've neglected the latter to the point where our national security is threatened.

frothing bigots ...... hapless xenophobes

Unnecessary rhetoric.

[nicmarlo]

bttt

[nicmarlo]

See thread North American Union to Replace USA? ("is this the plan?" alert!), 5/19/2006 | Jerome R. Corsi

[bitt]

look at #9!