Beneficial immigrants: skills and capital in short supply. Miguel de Izacaza (founder of Ximian and Mono, the project to allow Linux to use the Microsoft .NET framework) or several of the Mexican cement barons come to mind. A guy with no skills, illiteracy in Spanish, and a large group of dependents is a net drain.

Not only does he require more social spending than he brings in; he undercuts lower-skilled American citizens out of the workforce, who then require welfare or turn to petty crime amidst odd jobs.

So what's the winning strategy for allowing immigrants to cross the border illegally? Allowing Mexico to export it's corruption and violence problem northward (internal corruption and violence prevent jobs in Mexico)? All that does is guarantee that every Mexican citizen who can make it across will come across. Can we take another 40 million or so (who've indicated in polls they want to migrate here)? I submit not and no fence plus no enforcement here = US intervention openly in Mexico to run it as a territory to insure illegals don't flood out our labor markets.

Already in the rebuilding of New Orleans African Americans are complaining that they are able and willing to work, but are undercut in working conditions (no masks, or running water, or clean living conditions) by illegal aliens. As well as of course, pay. That defacto runs well below minimum wage. Why hire someone from New Orleans who requires decent housing (and running water, toilet facilities) when you can hire an illegal at a third of his wage who will live in a tent in the open amidst the rats and cockroaches?

Posted by: Jim Rockford on March 10, 2006 02:24 AM

Well, when one knows that the other countries that are "doing it" include Mexico, where most of the illegals are coming from, the "fairness" of restrictions may be looked at somewhat differently.

Posted by: Robert Speirs on March 10, 2006 10:56 AM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?