Mexico Demands U.S. Allow More Immigration

[rmnunez]

I think the problem with immigration is that many discussing it think this is something that can be effectively controlled with better borders. Immigration is a global phenomena involving millions of people in a wide range of settings and circumstances.

Globalization means communications are easier now and this has meant the range of immigration has increased, more people are migrating farther. US fears of terrorism, though recent, have also had a big impact. Now immigrants face more dangers at higher expense in greater illegality thanks to a 'hardening' of attitudes resulting from (or justified as) concern over terrorism.

The US-Mexico problem has its unique particularities which focus on 3 inescapable features; proximity, tradition and economic disparity. Something similar happens in France with North Africans. Wherever you have a prosperous community next door to a poor region there will be this flow from the poor to the other.

To adress the problem sensibly requires we first recognize how irrelevant terrorist concerns actually are in this issue. Terrorists don't infiltrate roving bands of immigrants to follow their routes and sneak across borders.

[brien]

Quote by: rmnunez I think the problem with immigration is that many discussing it think this is something that can be effectively controlled with better borders. Immigration is a global phenomena involving millions of people in a wide range of settings and circumstances. Globalization means communications are easier now and this has meant the range of immigration has increased, more people are migrating farther. US fears of terrorism, though recent, have also had a big impact. Now immigrants face more dangers at higher expense in greater illegality thanks to a 'hardening' of attitudes resulting from (or justified as) concern over terrorism. The US-Mexico problem has its unique particularities which focus on 3 inescapable features; proximity, tradition and economic disparity. Something similar happens in France with North Africans. Wherever you have a prosperous community next door to a poor region there will be this flow from the poor to the other. To adress the problem sensibly requires we first recognize how irrelevant terrorist concerns actually are in this issue. Terrorists don't infiltrate roving bands of immigrants to follow their routes and sneak across borders.

rmnunez:

This discussion has absolutely nothing to do with immigration to any other country except between the US and Mexico. I have no problem whatsoever with immigration into the US, but I will write this until I become blue in the face: There must be legal ports of entry only. No matter what the consequences, the tide of undocumented workers must be stopped and rechanneled through legal ports of entry.

Both Mexico and the United States are nations of laws and those laws must be enforced and respected by both nations otherwise justice breaks downs, social order breaks down, and law abiding citizens will lose all respect for the rule of law. The ramifications of continued illegal entry into the US from Mexico are far reaching and continue to undermine the labor laws of the United States.

Controlling the legal flow of immigrants will solve many problems, least of which is the artificial wage scale that is created by the undocumented workers. When the excess undocumented labor is curtailed, wages will rise that will accurately reflect the labor supply that is available to the employers in the US. This will benefit ALL workers, not just the undocumented ones that are the cause of the de facto artifical wage controls that are in place now.

Immigration control is absolutely necessary to begin to correct a host of problems caused by the flow of undocumented workers here in the US. The sooner this situation is under control, the quicker everyone will benefit, most of all, the workers themselves. The natural increase in wages through the economic relationship between the supply and demand of the available labor, and its positive effects upon the wages of that labor pool avaiable in the US, will have to rise to meet the demand by labor from employers in the US. This is a simple case of supply and demand which is being unaturallly affected by a undocumented labor pool. When the flow of undocumented workers is controlled by the border authorities, it will curtail the vast availibility of undocumented labor, and wages will have to rise due to a shortage of labor. It is a win win situation for all workers in the US.

[rmnunez]

brien, I think this is really just a hope of yours:

When the excess undocumented labor is curtailed, wages will rise that will accurately reflect the labor supply that is available to the employers in the US.

It makes logical sense, as far as it goes. If the borders were effectively sealed and only the 140 thousand or so allocated slots for temporary migrant workers were allowed, wages would have to rise. This, you think, would make the jobs attractive enough for even united statians to take them, which (you also think) would be better for the US economy.

What you ignore is the size of the problem. If twice as many undocumented workers as the allocated slots, take the risk and cross the border to visit their families in Mexico for Christmas, you should get an idea of the magnitude of labor demands in the US. As I've noted (more than once) the growth of the US economy is generating lots of low end service-sector jobs. Making those jobs highly-paid doesn't solve the problem of who will fill the positions as it is forecasted the aging population and low birth rate in the US will result in more vacancies than there are able-bodied united statians capable of filling.

And then there is the foreseable consequence of doubling the salary to janitors, store clerks, short-order cooks, supermarket bag-boys and car parking attendants everywhere -gross inflation more harshly felt at the low end.

[brien]

Quote by: rmnunez brien, I think this is really just a hope of yours: It makes logical sense, as far as it goes. If the borders were effectively sealed and only the 140 thousand or so allocated slots for temporary migrant workers were allowed, wages would have to rise. This, you think, would make the jobs attractive enough for even united statians to take them, which (you also think) would be better for the US economy. What you ignore is the size of the problem. If twice as many undocumented workers as the allocated slots, take the risk and cross the border to visit their families in Mexico for Christmas, you should get an idea of the magnitude of labor demands in the US. As I've noted (more than once) the growth of the US economy is generating lots of low end service-sector jobs. Making those jobs highly-paid doesn't solve the problem of who will fill the positions as it is forecasted the aging population and low birth rate in the US will result in more vacancies than there are able-bodied united statians capable of filling. And then there is the foreseable consequence of doubling the salary to janitors, store clerks, short-order cooks, supermarket bag-boys and car parking attendants everywhere -gross inflation more harshly felt at the low end.

So what is wrong with the law of supply and demand? I am not seeking to protect anyone's job. I am writing that if the law of supply and demand is allowed to govern, every worker would benefit.

The size of the problem is only related to the labor force. If there are jobs that go unfiulled in the Southwest because of low wages, then until the wages rise, those jobs will remain unfilled. If Company A pays $7 per hr, and Company B pays $10 per hr, the $10 per hr jobs will be filled first. If Comapny A doesn't raise their wage level, they will either go out of business or have to make up the wage gap through another means, perhaps through benefits. The point is that no matter how large the problem, it will be solved by the law of supply and demand.

If certain parts of the country exhaust their labor pool, then people from other parts of the country will migrate toward those jobs. When the labor pools swells, then the wages will decrease. When the USA reaches full employment, then the government will have to catch up to the situation by increasing the levels of immigration from Mexico, and other countries. It is a situation that requiure attention now. On this we all agree.

The type of jobs makes no difference when there is a labor shortage. They can be MC Donalds jobs or they can be landscaping jobs. It makes no difference because wages for unskilled labor are relative to the labor supply in the market it exists. A Mc Donald's worker in Connecticut earns a higher wage than one in Mississippi. If there are more unskilled jobs available in New York, and those jobs pay less than in Connecticut, NY will eventually have to raise the hourly wage of its unskilled jobs in order to attract the labor to fill those jobs. When that happens, it will then attract the labor from neighboring states to fill the job openings, thereby drawing down the labor pool.

No matter how you rationalize it, the law of supply and demand will work to the benefit of all workers, both natives and immigrants.

As for inflation, wage and prices always find their workable levels better without government intevention. This was proved in the Nixon Administration when price controls failed miserably. When wages rise, prices will rise, but the level of equity will find and correct itself in the market.

[rmnunez]

The forecasted labor shortages and low birth-rates in the US are nationwide, not something that can be compensated for with domestic immigration. It is anticipated 77 million united statians, not just Southwesterners, will retire in the next 4 years, where is the US going to get people to fill their vacancies? I supose robotics might help, but can that many of these sort of jobs be filled with machines?

Inflation is amenable to government controls, it has been successfully throttled since Nixon through governmental banking controls regulating the money supply.

A 5% unemployment rate, is negligible, a good symptom in any economy. Full employment in all sectors a theoretical notion not seen even under communism with its mandatory employment.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez As I've noted (more than once) the growth of the US economy is generating lots of low end service-sector jobs. Making those jobs highly-paid doesn't solve the problem of who will fill the positions as it is forecasted the aging population and low birth rate in the US will result in more vacancies than there are able-bodied united statians capable of filling.

Yeah, you've noted it several times, but the only evidence you offer for these claims is from a website that is definitely pro-immigration. How about some realistic objective links to back up these claims? Also, how about that apparent 8% unemployment rate among illegal immigrants?

Quote by: rmnunez And then there is the foreseable consequence of doubling the salary to janitors, store clerks, short-order cooks, supermarket bag-boys and car parking attendants everywhere -gross inflation more harshly felt at the low end.

And, as usual, you conveniently overlook the costs to taxpayers for things like illegals in our prisons, free schooling, and free medical service for illegals. When people aren't paid a living wage, they don't pay taxes, and the taxpayers end up subsidizing those businesses that hire them. Raise wages and you raise tax revenues.

[rmnunez]

The 8% unemployment rate is derived (though not by me) from the "oncenoticias" item posted which found 92% of the undocumented in the US were employed, they also mention the 77 million united statian manpower shortage by 2010. "Oncenoticias" is a news broadcaster in Mexico City owned and operated by "Televisa", its Mexican, but other than that unbiased. The US Census Bureau (also linked reiteratedly by me -though in another thread here) provides data on the 1.8 birth rate (I think replacement level is supposed to be 2.2. and that they clocked Hispanics at 2.8).

[rmnunez]

http://oncetv-ipn.net/noticias/index...-14&numnota=81 Actualmente 92% de los indocumentados tienen empleo en Estados Unidos, mientras que en los próximos diez años saldrán más de 77 millones de estadounidenses de la población económicamente activa. Lo que representa un mercado atractivo para la mano de obra migrante.

(seventh paragraph down)

Here I posted 2 US census Bureau links that relate to the growing proportion of Hispanics or Mexicans in the US demographic: Mexico on the scene:

I think you can find the data on birth rates through the non-.pdf Census link

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez "Oncenoticias" is a news broadcaster in Mexico City owned and operated by "Televisa", its Mexican, but other than that unbiased.

And who are the owners of Televisa?? The enormous advantages of sluffing off the social costs of it's own poor and unemployed and reaping the millions they send home from the U.S. effectively disqualifies ANY Mexican source from being considered "unbiased".

If U.S. birth rates are below replacement levels, we only have to ramp up legal immigration to ameliorate that situation. There are simply no advantages to illegal immigration to anyone except those that exploit people desperate enough to take the risks to get here.

[rmnunez]

Yes Zee, the US needs to "ramp up" (or raise) legal immigration, allowing 140 thousand H-1Bs just means the the rest of the immigrant workers are illegal, so adjust the settings and there will be fewer illegals. Illegal immigration is just a function of how difficult it is to comply with the law. Incidentally, the H-1B slots for 2007 become available this year on March 28th and are expected to be exhausted within 2 weeks or 10 days (2008's slots become available in October).

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez (seventh paragraph down) Here I posted 2 US census Bureau links that relate to the growing proportion of Hispanics or Mexicans in the US demographic: Mexico on the scene: I think you can find the data on birth rates through the non-.pdf Census link

Nice attempt at misdirection. You claim that the U.S. birth rate is below replacement levels (".....provides data on the 1.8 birth rate (I think replacement level is supposed to be 2.2. and that they clocked Hispanics at 2.8...")), yet the link you provided clearly shows no such thing, with white population alone climbing from 282 million in 2000 to 419 million in 2050. While it is true that the percentage of the population that is of Hispanic descent rises, it is the millions of illegal Mexican immigrants that effectively contribute to this increase.

Your practice of deceit and obfuscation of the facts is really wearing thin.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez Yes Zee, the US needs to "ramp up" (or raise) legal immigration, allowing 140 thousand H-1Bs just means the the rest of the immigrant workers are illegal, so adjust the settings and there will be fewer illegals. Illegal immigration is just a function of how difficult it is to comply with the law. Incidentally, the H-1B slots for 2007 become available this year on March 28th and are expected to be exhausted within 2 weeks or 10 days (2008's slots become available in October).

You still haven't presented any unbiased evidence of such a "need". There is no other country in the world (that I am aware of) that refuses to establish secure borders and permits unchecked undocumented immigration. Not even your own. Yet you continue to "demand" that we do just that. I'm thinking that it may be time for me to consider emigration from this country. Perhaps to Mexico.

[rmnunez]

Zee, you'll need to go into the Census source (see the links at the bottom of the page). Found this bouncing around the site which gives a good indication of the worker shortage problem:

Other highlights: In 2000, each of the nation’s 50 states had more people under 18 than 65 and older. In fact, in about half of the states, the ratio was more than two to one. In 2030, 10 states are projected to have more people 65 and older than under 18: Florida, Delaware, Maine, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming. In six states, more than one in every four residents would be age 65 and older in 2030: Florida, Wyoming, Maine, New Mexico, Montana and North Dakota. As the oldest baby boomers become senior citizens in 2011, the population 65 and older is projected to grow faster than the total population in every state. In fact, 26 states are projected to double their 65- and-older population between 2000 and 2030. These projections were produced by the Population Division in correspondence with the U.S. interim projections released in March 2004. They were developed for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia by age and sex for the years 2000 to 2030, based on Census 2000 results. These projections differ from forecasts in that they represent the results of the mathematical projection model given that current state-specific trends in fertility, mortality, internal migration and international migration continue. The projections to 2004 have been superseded by population estimates at http://www.census.gov/popest/estimates.php http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/...on/004704.html

[rmnunez]

On the immigration phenomena in a globalized world, the Chinese routes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/797489.stm

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez Zee, you'll need to go into the Census source (see the links at the bottom of the page). Found this bouncing around the site which gives a good indication of the worker shortage problem:

Perhaps you should consider the same research for your own country:

"As a result of the demographic and epidemiological transitions in the last two decades, the age structure of the population in Mexico has undergone important transformations. The population aged 65 or older in Mexico represented about 4.5 percent of the population in 1997, but its rate of growth is increasing in time: from 2 percent annual growth in 1970 to 3.7 percent in 1990, to 3.9 percent in 1998. It is expected that the population aged 60 or older will represent about 16 percent of the total by the year 2030." http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...s&ct=clnk&cd=6

Can Mexico afford to continue to send it's younger citizens north when it faces the same problems you envision for the U.S.?

[rmnunez]

Mexico really can't afford to keep losing its younger and most productive citizens to immigration, this is why Fox wisely notoriously remarked that within 10 years the US would be begging Mexico to send more people.

By 2010, the disposable income of Hispanics will exceed $1.08 trillion, or 9.2% of total purchasing power nationwide, according to the Selig Center for Economic Growth at the University of Georgia. Even as Congress debates their legal status, banks are tailoring their products to meet the country’s newest residents where they work and live, installing ATMs in meatpacking plants and creating special mortgage packages that don’t require the traditional documentation. After experiencing decades of financial crises and currency devaluations in Latin America, first-generation immigrants often prefer to carry cash than to deposit their money in the bank. Concerns about the number of immigrants who do not have bank accounts have prompted officials at Federal Reserve banks across the country to encourage lenders to develop alternative means to bring Latino families into the banking system. One-third of US-born Hispanic residents and over half of all Mexican immigrants lack bank accounts, according to 2000 figures from the US Census Bureau. But there’s no single formula that meets the diverse needs of the Latino market. Many undocumented Latino immigrants shy away from mainstream lenders for fear that giving over personal identification could result in deportation. The USA Patriot Act requires banks to ask customers opening an account for their name, date of birth, address and a taxpayer identification number. In Illinois, non-citizens can now qualify for state-administered mortgage loans by providing a government-issued alternative to the Social Security number. In Kansas City, Mo., a family-owned bank with just eight branches started selling stored-value cards, a “starter” product that’s not a bank account, but gets clients ready to open one. As baby boomers age and their savings leave the financial system, banks see the Latino population’s relative youth as a plus. By 2010, a study by the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University shows Latinos will account for nearly one-third of the homebuying pool.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez Mexico really can't afford to keep losing its younger and most productive citizens to immigration, this is why Fox wisely notoriously remarked that within 10 years the US would be begging Mexico to send more people.

Ok, you've convinced me. I am all for unrestricted immigration to the U.S., especially by Mexican young people. I will emigrate to Mexico and spend my retirement years there thanks to the low cost of living. They will come here, work and pay the social security taxes that are then sent to me to finance my retirement. I think this might work.

[SteveA]

Quote by: Zeebadee Ok, you've convinced me. I am all for unrestricted immigration to the U.S., especially by Mexican young people. I will emigrate to Mexico and spend my retirement years there thanks to the low cost of living. They will come here, work and pay the social security taxes that are then sent to me to finance my retirement. I think this might work.

Yes, excellent plan and the "ownership society" idea of Bush (and the Federal Reserve as an accomplish) made it so everyone can "own" a large amount of debt, even a new immigrant with little income yet is fair game for a few hundred thousand dollars of obligations. This easy money jacks up property values also and keeps property taxes high to assure everyone keeps working to pay for social programs, so we've got to be thankful for all the people getting shafted or we'd be unable to afford to pay the higher rents with SS checks.

Now after they're finished pulling the plug on this cash, the defaults will start rolling in and many of the prior independently owned properties will end in the hands of banks. I'm certain there are already a few examples of this scam in the history books. There's no way to 'win' in these games except to be the one controlling the money supply. Simply keeping what you already have is on par with a win.

[rmnunez]

I will emigrate to Mexico and spend my retirement years there thanks to the low cost of living. They will come here, work and pay the social security taxes that are then sent to me to finance my retirement.

Unfortunately, though with exageration, this is the gist of the situation. The demographic curve inevitably has this effect on these universal government-subsidized retirements.

The selection of Mexico as a retirement destination is quite the practice already (see Oaxaca).

Mexico will need to develop the custom of universal government-subsidized pensions for its own before they will accept working to subsidize these for foreign residents (they don't do this in the US where the practice is better established).