Illegal immigration 'a dagger aimed at our hearts'

The Globe Gazette ^ | 8/20/2005 | Linda Kane

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

ALBERT LEA, Minn. — Illegal immigration is a dagger aimed at the heart of Americans, according to U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a leader in the fight against illegal immigration.

Republican Congressmen Gil Gutknecht from Minnesota and Tancredo, chairman of the 70-member House Immigration Reform Caucus, spoke to 100 people at a luncheon Tuesday in Albert Lea.

"Please think about national security," Tancredo said. "People are coming across our borders to do very bad things to us."

The topic was based on immigration, whether legal or illegal.

"It has nothing to do with race, ethnicity or country of origin" but everything to do with the problems that stem from it, Tancredo said.

Those include economic, employment and labor issues as well as crime rates, to name a few, he said.

He said illegal immigration wouldn't be such a big problem if the federal government would enforce the law.

"We have national security problems," he said. Not securing America's borders is the most shameful act on the part of the federal government, Tancredo said.

"This issue of massive immigration is a dagger pointing at our heart," he said.

Tancredo said momentum is growing to combat immigration issues, but a "great wall of opposition" remains.

"I want you to ask your local elected officials — I don't care if it's the county commissioners or the governor — ‘What are you going to do about this issue,' " Tancredo said.

A woman in the audience asked Tancredo if he planned to run for president.

"We need you," she said.

Tancredo said he would if the issue doesn't gain attention at the presidential level.

Gutknecht told the crowd that immigration is an issue that deserves national attention, and he provided many statistics and facts about immigration.

His family emigrated from Germany, Gutknecht said, and he fully supports legal immigration. However, "We cannot encourage individuals to break our laws and enter the country illegally.

"Border protection is important to our national security and economy. For more than two centuries, Americans have fought to protect our sovereignty and secure our borders. Sadly, today our borders are a sieve, allowing illegal immigrants to pour into the country," he added.

Gutknecht offered what he called a snapshot of a typical illegal alien: 32 years old with an average education of seven years, an hourly wage of $5.45 and an annual individual income of $8,982.

Other facts he presented:

-- 42 percent of births to immigrants are to illegal alien mothers. In 2005, births to illegal aliens will account for one in 10 births in the United States.

-- Illegal aliens are eligible for emergency Medicaid services and other medical services.

-- More than 29 percent of federal prisoners are aliens.

-- 55 percent of hired farm workers are unauthorized to work in the U.S.

-- In Minnesota, the cost to educate children of illegal aliens was more than $276 million.

"Facts are stubborn things," Gutknecht said.

Ken Dalager traveled to Albert Lea with at least 10 others from Austin concerned about illegal immigration.

"The people that go to the trouble of getting citizenship, I don't think they're much trouble," Dalager said. "The others slip in undercover and just kind of do things how they want to do them."

Conversations grew heated before the congressmen started speaking, however, as people debated the issue during dinner conversation.

"A simple way to stop illegal immigration is to find the companies that hire them," an Austin woman said.

Everybody is an immigrant, Dalager said. His family migrated from Norway, but years ago policies were different, he said.

"My cousin went to country school and the school board went to her house and said she had better talk English before they sent her to school," he said. "Today they're bending over backwards. You've got to hire two teachers," one that speaks English and one that speaks Spanish.

Paul Westrum of Albert Lea believes in "a common- sense approach to our immigration policy."

He was invited to Tuesday's luncheon by Gutknecht.

"If we don't do something about this immigration issue, we're going to lose our country as we know it," said Westrum, who has researched immigration issues for nearly a decade.

[junta]

We can thank the OBL types (dane, bayourod, WSJ)and multiculturalists for the next civil war. For some reason they work well together.

[William Terrell]

I've observed illegals in North Carolina, Georgia and Alabama. At best, what they add to the economy is a zero sum, considering what they cost, besides the cultural impacts.

If they make 20k/yr, well, I know plenty of Americans that are here legally, born here, in fact, that would like to make that. I think your numbers are far off. On the one hand, illegal Mexicans just take the jobs that Americans don't want and on the other hand they make $20,000 a year, which is certainly what some Americans I know would like to make.

You are exactly right. I'm biased as hell. That you are not, frankly, disturbs me. I don't want to "limit" illegal immigration; I want to end it altogether. It disturbs me that you only want to limit it.

You don't limit the spread of a deadly disease, or the invasion of a nation, you eradicate it.

[A. Pole]

Exchanging labor for wages is one way to create wealth, although in most cases not as quickly as their employer. So it incorrect to say that there is choice between supporting workers or supporting wealth-creators.

You logic is faulty. Of course there is a choice and freemarketeers make one.

Second WHY DO YOU OPPOSE workers and "wealth-creators"? Workers ARE the wealth creators even if they do not share in it. You are confusing the creation of wealth with acquiring/owning it.

[A. Pole]

I find Mr Pole's comments insightful. However in this case you are right and he is zero sum.

Thank you for compliment. But I do not believe in zero sum.

The sum usually is negative or positive, but the secind still can be bad.

Negative if we remove regulations and allow the radical stratification of wealth we might end up with very rich minority and very poor majority in Latin American oligarchical model.

Oligarchist freemarketeers believe that if you squeeze workers to the subsistence level, if you remove social spending on education, health care and housing you make society more prosperous just because the few can enjoy opulence in the gated and protected communities with the armies of security guards and servants.

They hate any form of New Deal and imagine that it is better to own 20 millions in Bogota, Columbia than have 5 millions in Weston, Massachusetts. They do not want large uppity middle class around. They are the real believers in zero sum economy. They do not realise that by ruining lower classes they lead to the contraction of economy and to the poisoning of the society.

Now the sum can be positive and still bad. Imagine situation that there are two families in US, one making 100K per year and another making 30K per year. If you increase the income of the first by 20K at the expense of the second losing 15K you INCREASE the total from 130K to 135K. But you improve standard of living of the first by little while you make the second miserable.

In large scale it might lead to the social deterioration and costs not detectable by been counters..

[palmer]

You need to read my other posts. The reason why an illegal can make $100/day is because there is more expense and even more risk hiring legal workers for the same amount. Many small manual labor businesses can't afford to comply with the regulations and paperwork. Illegals get the jobs and cash at the end of the day because of our socialist taxation and regulation of businesses.

[A. Pole]

Clearly illegal labor expands the economy.

And if the borders were completely open and 300 millions people from the Third World migrated in, the economy would get even larger.

[A. Pole]

We gave slaves more consideration.

That is why the slavery was superior to the Free Market ideology. Slave owners were morally responsible for their slaves. Free-marketeers see the workers as a mere commodity, useless or harmful if not profitable.

[A. Pole]

(Once again - Economics 101): If I employ you, the wages I pay you are an expense to me. [...]

Yes, but is an ideological abstraction. When you employ human beings you enter into interpersonal relationship. You become morally obliged and your employees become obliged to you. And you are obliged to the whole society as well. The rights without obligations are a fiction.

Market system is ONLY A TOOL to advance the general welfare of the society. It is not a god or absolute. The real God gave you talents and goods in order for you to do good, and not to promote selfishness. And it is better if you pay workers more than the market forces you to do and it is better than to give to the charity.

[palmer]

Oligarchist freemarketeers believe that if you squeeze workers to the subsistence level, if you remove social spending on education, health care and housing you make society more prosperous just because the few can enjoy opulence in the gated and protected communities with the armies of security guards and servants.

Americans are the elite in their gated and (relatively) protected land. We are vastly overpaid, coddled with government handouts including education, medical and housing subsidies. We are indeed squeezing foreign workers to the subsistence level by allowing countries like China to ramp up their productive capacity on the backs of their workers.

But to get back to my point on this thread, it is clear that legal and illegal immigrants add to our economy. They ship relatively few dollars back overseas. They are wealth creators like you say but do not enable exploitation by wealth-takers as you suggest. That wealth-taking is provided by our government by burdening business with taxes and regulations that cause legal labor to be devalued, especially manual labor. There may be a special "tax" if a business is caught hiring illegals but the risk of that is much lower than the risk of getting audited over deduction of the expenses of legal employees.

The bottom line is that in the relative free market for illegal labor there is a large amount of wealth being created by employers and shared with employees who spend a large portion of that wealth consuming services and products in the rest of our economy.

[A. Pole]

I contribute to the free clinic in the neighboring county which gives care to anyone.

It is better to promote such wage structure that workers do not need to rely on charity.

[A. Pole]

IMHO we need a new word for "immigration" when it comes to what we've see over the past one or two decades.

Invasion?

[A. Pole]

Rush Limbaugh has a lot to answer for. [...]

I was just going to say something similar about the hypnotic Hush Bimbo cult, bu you were faster.

[fallujah-nuker]

Edwin Rubenstein has estimated that present immigration policy costs the average US born worker nearly 2600 dollars per year. The site is not allowed on Free Republic, but just enter "rubenstein immigration policy costing worker" into google and you will find the source, read the one archived from 10-21-03.

[skeeter]

Edwin Rubenstein has estimated that present immigration policy costs the average US born worker nearly 2600 dollars per year. The site is not allowed on Free Republic, but just enter "rubenstein immigration policy costing worker" into google and you will find the source, read the one archived from 10-21-03.

Its certainly true for workers in California. Basic math indicates a CA family of four will pay over $1000 dollars per year to support the 9 billion/year cost of illegal immigration.

[fallujah-nuker]

"Its certainly true for workers in California. Basic math indicates a CA family of four will pay over $1000 dollars per year to support the 9 billion/year cost of illegal immigration."

And the main impact in his article was lowered wages. The social services to illegals force American workers to subsidize the lowering of their own wages! Kind of like a Chinese execution, where the family of the executed is billed for the bullet.

[skeeter]

And the main impact in his article was lowered wages. The social services to illegals force American workers to subsidize the lowering of their own wages! Kind of like a Chinese execution, where the family of the executed is billed for the bullet.

And I don't care if they do buy enough potato chips & coca colas to compensate for their immense cost. Their uninhibited presence here is morally offensive. That is my bottom line.

[fallujah-nuker]

"And I don't care if they do buy enough potato chips & coca colas to compensate for their immense cost. Their uninhibited presence here is morally offensive. That is my bottom line."

Balkanization. This past Saturday we went to park north of Seattle called Picnic Point, great park, right on the beach, been there many times. This time there was a baby seal on the beach, I've lived in the Puget Sound area since 1961 and this was the first time I had ever seen a seal on the beach. I sat on a log to watch it, but shortly a group of about 5 Spanish speaking children gathered around and began throwing stones at it and drove it into the water.

The children were all unsupervised as the grownups were all at the picnic tables pounding down brews. I think the seal may even be protected by federal law from harassment, but I suppose if you don't respect federal immigration laws how could you be expected to obey any other?

[andy58-in-nh]

Liberty is not an "ideological abstraction". It is a fundamental right of Man. My moral obligation is to treat people as I would have them treat me - fairly, honestly, and with compassion. I am not obligated to employ anyone, nor do I owe "society" one Goddamned thing. Society is the true ideological abstraction - Freedom is not. I do not ask anyone to live for me, nor will I live for the sake of another person. That means that I pay people what I honestly believe they are worth - to me- and perhaps a little more than that as a way to insure that they stick around. That little act of "selfishness" benefits them as well as me.

Capitalism not only works, but it is morally superior to Socialism, which insists on robbing the productive and the creative in the name of "justice" and giving to those less deserving in the name of "compassion". Isn't it revealing that societies based upon Socialist precepts always wind up either bankrupt, or in ruins? But then, Capitalism is always judged by its excesses, but Socialism is judged only by its promises.

[A. Pole]

nor do I owe "society" one Goddamned thing.

Tell it for example to the tax collector. You owe society a lot.

You refer to God by your curse word and yet you owe your family, friends, neighbors, local community, even strangers to give in the end the account before the Highest Judge. Those who claim not to be their brothers keepers will share the lot of Cain.

Society is the true ideological abstraction - Freedom is not.

Human beings ALWAYS were part of their societies. Societies, tribes, families were before individuals and before the modern concept of freedom (invented in the last few centuries). Society is not abstraction (unless you mean by it the XVIIIc idea of mythical contract based association of primordial individuals).

The true freedom in traditional meaning is a gift of God which enables us to SERVE Him out of our free choice and not by compulsion.

[William Terrell]

Illegals get the jobs and cash at the end of the day because of our socialist taxation and regulation of businesses.

I agree. But, when we are Balkanized, with political factions representing cultures that are very different from ours waring with one another over the American pie, with large numbers of Americans off the wage rolls or working for sustinance pay, such that we have to depend on importing foreign slave labor made products so people can afford them, bemoaning the fact that socialist taxation and regulation was the root cause will be little comfort.

We must get tough. Expend the manpower and materials to eliminate the capability to easilly cross the southern border. Spend the 5 years or so to identify and deport immediately illegals a group at a time.

Deny them the nipple and deny the businesses to cheap labor.

"Diseases desperate grown/By desperate appliance are relieved, Or not at all."