"myths And Half-truths About Illegal Immigration"

[Gods_Mercenary]

A war in which many Afghani civilians and children were killed. If you call that a succesful defence, then you have a slightly different defenition than I do. By the way, the war may have had a different outcome if it wasn't for the support given by a certain statist country known as the U,S,

[notworthabean]

Quote by: Keith Hamburger It worked quite well for the Afghanis when the Russians invaded. Keith

not really, their country was ruined, it took 10 years and they needed americas help. had they not had the worst terrain int he world, and americna rockets they would ahv ebeen crushed.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Yah, insurgency does more harm than the actual invaders.

[rmnunez]

The 28 million Mexicans living in the US are not only an important source of income for Mexico as they sent $23 billion in remitances to their families in 2006, they have also acquired importance in the industrial restructuring of the US. Raúl Delgado, from the (International Migration and Development Network), said “if we take into account the maquiladoras which are like extensions of US assembly lines with lower wages, then 20% of manufacturing workers in the US is a Mexican, this gives an idea of their importance in that restructuring.

What is this "industrial restructuring"? I've heard of the outsourcing, and competition from cheaper paying foreign manufacturers has shut down lots of factories. Environmental protections and safeguards at the work site have driven lots of industries out of business and now the US economy is much more service-oriented.

The importance of this labor force is proportionate to the economic and social harms resulting to Mexico from migration. Based on research, at least 800 towns across Mexico suffer from negative growth rates due to migration to the north. The UN estimates a tenth of the population in the northern Mexican states is immigrant.

Yes, this is a problem ignored to the north, the united statians can't see the adverse effects all these immigrants have at home; kids raised by their mothers without a male role model, living in the uncertainty of a distant and precarious provider constantly threatened with deportation.

Though the efforts to stem migration by the Mexican government must be recognized, there are pending matters, from the conditions in the south promoting migration to the laws which constrain development there. Juan Artola, frrom the International Organization for Immigration found “Mexican immigration legislation is antiquated and in the opinion of many needs review.”

Yes, we've got an immigration problem in Mexico too. The southern border is like the northern one but concentrated; the river is smaller and the crossing points more closely together. Guatemalans and other Central Americans make their way north in great danger.

To use valuable, skilled, qualified and experienced Mexican human resources in the US, private institutions and non-governmental organizations are compiling information on immigration in Mexico and elsewhere to develop a database to help implement programs and projects with, for and by immigrants. “What is happening is that the issue of immigration is a bit behind other issues due to the absence of public data and the lack of similarity in data compiled by different countries”, Jorge Sicilia, from BBVA Bancomer’s American Economic Studies said. During the (International Conference on Immigration and Development), to be held in Mexico City February 14-16 where participants will share and have access to all the data gathered. Sistema e-once noticias Internet

[Zeebadee]

LOL!!! Your post is absolutely hilarious!

Quote by: rmnunez What is this "industrial restructuring"? I've heard of the outsourcing, and competition from cheaper paying foreign manufacturers has shut down lots of factories. Environmental protections and safeguards at the work site have driven lots of industries out of business and now the US economy is much more service-oriented.

The "industrial restructuring" refers to the (as Ross Perot accurately predicted) sucking sound of U.S. jobs moving to mexico. And yeah, it's the "Environmental protections and safeguards at the work site" that have driven U.S. manufacturers to close American plants and move them to mexico, not the cheap labor rates. Sure. "Service oriented". I've heard this described as, "We're all gonna get rich doing each others laundry".

Quote by: rmnunez Yes, this is a problem ignored to the north, the united statians can't see the adverse effects all these immigrants have at home; kids raised by their mothers without a male role model, living in the uncertainty of a distant and precarious provider constantly threatened with deportation.

LOL!!! More hilarity! Ah, it's for the children!! If the mexican government was really concerned about this, they wouldn't be encouraging their own countrymen to go north, or printing pamphlets describing the best ways to successfully illegally enter the U.S.

Quote by: rmnunez Yes, we've got an immigration problem in Mexico too. The southern border is like the northern one but concentrated; the river is smaller and the crossing points more closely together. Guatemalans and other Central Americans make their way north in great danger.

The real "immigration problem" mexico has is continuing to downplay the hypocrisy of the mexican government in complaining about lax U.S. immigration policies while enforcing far more harsh methods of their own.

Your entire post is nothing more than a thinly veiled gloat over successfully dumping the social costs your unwanted indigent onto the American taxpayer. I'd report you for flamebaiting if I thought it would do any good. What a crock.

[rmnunez]

Zee, you should look into this issue more carefully, do some research and you will find there are numerous Mexican government plans, projects and programs aimed at reducing migration and promoting the return of Mexicans who've gone to work in the US.

Migration from Mexico is economically premised, people go north looking for work they can't find at home. However governments don't control economies and they are limited in what they can accomplish, particularly in poorer countries with weak tax structures.

Whether the Mexican government can reduce migration through development is not at all that clear. During Fox's term they implemented a slew of efforts to promote local development and offer employment opportunities, to no avail. With more government spending and less corruption, we still saw increased migration, despite positive economic growth and no end-of-term financial debacles.

What I got from the note (which I posted to show how Mexico is aware of and dealing with the issue of migration) was the idea there was a substantial and relatively well-qualified workforce Mexico could draw from in the US. This is important since, as the Mexican economy continues to grow and jobs become more complicated, experienced workers will be needed.

[notworthabean]

indeed rmuniez, i hope (to both our countire benfit) to over then ex t50/100 years a gradual intergration/perhaps even united status of the various n.american countries,but not till things (like vast ecnomci disparities) get solved, as it woudl be verrrry unpopular in america for mexico to suddeny be abel to vote themselves welfare/healthcare at the tax payers to the norths expesne.

plus how cool would it be to have hte panama canal back from the chicoms

[rmnunez]

Migration from Mexico has more to do with the fact one is paid 8 to 10 times more for the same job in the US than anything else.

Though the Mexican government could certainly do more to promote conditions fostering employment, governments in general don't control their economies which tend to improve and generate jobs or not based on market trends and business cycles.

Governments try to control their economies using tax incentives, interest rates, trade barriers and through infrastructural improvements. But the Mexican government inadequately taxes and lacks the resources, it has been ridden with corruption for eons and unaccustomed to accounting for much. Right now the hot topic in Mexican politics is the proposed national reforms which would include constitutional amendments and a much more effective tax system. Naturally this worries a lot of people who tend to adopt the traditional political postures. Maneuvering fiscal incentives, trade barriers and infrastructural upgrades to promote economic development is hard enough when done by a fully-developed superpower with a huge population and a tremendous economy, when this is attempted by an inexperienced and much poorer government in a lesser-developed country, success is more uncertain.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: rmnunez Migration from Mexico has more to do with the fact one is paid 8 to 10 times more for the same job in the US than anything else. Though the Mexican government could certainly do more to promote conditions fostering employment, governments in general don't control their economies which tend to improve and generate jobs or not based on market trends and business cycles. Governments try to control their economies using tax incentives, interest rates, trade barriers and through infrastructural improvements. But the Mexican government inadequately taxes and lacks the resources, it has been ridden with corruption for eons and unaccustomed to accounting for much. Right now the hot topic in Mexican politics is the proposed national reforms which would include constitutional amendments and a much more effective tax system. Naturally this worries a lot of people who tend to adopt the traditional political postures. Maneuvering fiscal incentives, trade barriers and infrastructural upgrades to promote economic development is hard enough when done by a fully-developed superpower with a huge population and a tremendous economy, when this is attempted by an inexperienced and much poorer government in a lesser-developed country, success is more uncertain.

Perhaps one option would be to remove restrictions on foreign investment in Mexico. Personally, I think that our government has failed in diplomacy over the issue of "illegal immigrants". We should be negotiating an easing of restrictions on US investment and property ownership within Mexico in return for a more flexible "guest worker" program.

All we ever hear about are the demands of the Mexican government in regards to their "citizens" on this side of the border, and the problems of illegal immigration. What is the Mexican government willing to give in return for our assistance and relaxation of work regulations across the border?

That's the real meaning of diplomacy, which the US government is obviously lacking in.

Keith

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: rmnunez Though the Mexican government could certainly do more to promote conditions fostering employment, governments in general don't control their economies which tend to improve and generate jobs or not based on market trends and business cycles.

"Bryan R. Roberts and Agustin Escobar Latapi examine Mexican socioeconomic policies and conditions as potential factors in Mexican emigration, which, according to most analyses, rose to unprecedented levels in the 1980s and 1990s (in absolute numbers). They conclude that the most significant of these has been the failure of Mexico's cities to accommodate the large numbers of Mexican migrants. They stress that Mexico's education, health, and infrastructure policies and conditions were not factors in Mexican emigration: there was no substantial deterioration in social welfare throughout the country in the 1980s. In the 1990s, the student-teacher ratio improved, and illiteracy among those 15 and older dropped between 1980 and 1990. Life expectancy rose in many areas, and the percentage of Mexicans living in homes without running water dropped in that same decade. Despite the country's economic problems in the last two decades, real income levels rose in some areas, leading the authors to conclude that this did not act as a significant push factor. Mexico's rural areas saw few of the improvements mentioned above, however, and that fact, combined with federal policies designed to adjust and restructure economic activities, put pressure on Mexico's cities, which proved unable to support the number of migrants that poured into them. The resulting income inequality, unemployment, poor housing conditions, high local taxes, and limited opportunities for increased income, especially in border cities, led to the rise in Mexican emigration. Mexican social policy should, therefore, make its first concern the improvement of conditions in the country's growing cities. Roberts and Latapi's conclusions contradict the 1980s literature which stressed the impact of Mexico's agricultural crisis on emigration. Their ultimate recommendation that the Mexican government address the "ability of the urban system to absorb Mexico's working population and provide it with long term security" (p. 71) ignores the root of that urban crisis: the fact that Mexicans in rural areas have no recourse except to go to the cities.

The Mexican government has reversed its policy of intensive participation in the agricultural sector in recent years, ending or revising its subsidy programs and dissolving some of the organizations and institutions that have supported Mexican farmers. Further, it has brought about tremendous changes in land tenure and has reduced protective tariffs. Mexican farm output has declined from a high of 6.6 percent average annual growth in the 1950s and 1960s to only .33 percent annually in the 1980s and '90s. Today agriculture is in crisis, a factor that will likely drive many in rural Mexico to seek a livelihood elsewhere. Many of them will relocate, at least temporarily, in the U.S." H-Net Review: Elaine C. Lacy <elalacy@vm.sc.edu> on At the Crossroads: Mexico Migration and U.S. Immigration Policy

Seems clear to me that the Mexican government is actively promoting migration of the poorest and least useful of it's citizens. The costs of social programs to support these people would be enormous, therefore, it's in the governments interests to dump those costs of gullible American taxpayers.

Quote by: Keith Hamburger Perhaps one option would be to remove restrictions on foreign investment in Mexico.

"In a series of papers, Shang-Jin Wei, formerly of the Kennedy School at Harvard and now with the IMF, explored the economic effect of corruption. Contrary to the notion that corruption is a relatively minor cost of doing business, Wei found that corruption has a stifling effect on foreign investment and economic growth.

<snip>

Wei found that reducing the level of corruption from the Mexican level to that in Singapore would have the same effect on foreign investment as reducing the tax on capital income by 50 percentage points. In other words, corruption reduces foreign investment as much as a tax that takes half of net income!"
Greasing Palms: Corruption in Mexico by Bernard Wasow - The Globalist > > Global Economy

Corruption is endemic in Mexico. Until the Mexicans themselves clean up their country foreign investment will be limited to those enterprises able to afford the bribes required to do business.

[rmnunez]

The Mexican government is doing a lot to promote development and mitigate the harms resulting from migration. They have many programs from different government agencies, most notably from the Secretariats for Economic and Social Development (Sedesol), for the Economy, for Agricultural Reform, the Environment, for Agriculture (w/o reform) and even for Tourism. Here are the first few I could readily find. States and municipal governments have their own programs. Calderon strongly supports microcredit, small business startup financing and all sorts of business development incubators projects, here are a few, most have English versions.

“Microregiones” program
“Farmworkers” program
“3 for 1” program (for Mexican immigrants)
“Youth for Mexico” program (social service in support of the “Microregiones” program)
“Rural Microcredit” program
“State Incentives” program (subsidies for state government programs)
“Habitat” program
Small scale housing loans
“Social Coinvestment” program
Financing for agricultural development
"Indigenous” program
“Gender Equity & Sustainable Development in the Environment” program
“Sustainable Development Advisory Bodies” program
“Farm Subsidies” program
“Magical Towns” program
Federal funding for regional touristic development
“Family Business” program:http://<br /> http://aplicaciones.e...ryText=FAMPYME
“Microcredit for Rural Women” program:http://<br /> http://aplicaciones.e...eryText=FOMMUR
“March South” program: http://www.economia.gob.mx/index.jsp?P=353
“Compite” program (technological innovation):http://<br /> http://aplicaciones.e...ryText=COMPITE
“Microcredit” program:http://<br /> http://aplicaciones.e...t=Microcredito
Agricultural Commercialization Support program
Cattle Support program
Farm Diesel subsidy program: http://www.procampo.gob.mx/present_diesel.html

From the article on Mexican corruption, something I mentioned myself:

Indeed, the rapidly growing giant economies of China and India are more corrupt than Mexico. But the ubiquity of corruption does not make it any less costly to low-income countries.

Something to consider when considering how endemic the practice:

Once embedded in the economic practices of a country, corruption is enormously difficult to remove. That is not because people are necessarily more tolerant or forgiving of corruption in a country where it is common than where it is rare.

And how it affects everyone:

My own friends in Mexico and Bangladesh are angry and bitter at the corrupt practices that make their lives difficult too. Who suffers when valuables cannot be sent through the mail and when insider connections and side payments are the way to get routine public services? Ordinary citizens suffer.

The problem:

Corruption creates a "prisoners' dilemma." If everyone becomes honest, everyone will be better off. But if some people are taking bribes, then there is a strong incentive for his colleagues to follow until everyone is corrupt. And then, how does one get to the more desirable situation where nobody is corrupt? In the end, most countries will muddle through, as the industrialized countries have done over the course of the last 200 years. They did set the example that it is possible to evolve from undemocratic, corruption-plagued systems to less corrupt places where people to go to the police for help —instead of hiding when they see a policeman.

[RickSp]

As this thread is discussing the wisdom of author who would only identify himself as "anonymous" and was first posted on the website of Glenn Spencer, a white supremicist vigilante, I suspect that any response is pretty pointless.

Nevertheless, here are the comments of someone with a name. Douglas S. Massey is the Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at Princeton University, where he is co-director of the Mexican Migration Project at the Office of Population Research. Massey's research focuses on international migration, race and housing, discrimination, education, urban poverty, and Latin America, especially Mexico. He is the author, most recently, of Crossing the Border: Research from the Mexican Migration Project (with Jorge Durand), and International Migration: Prospects and Policies in a Global Market (co-edited with J. Edward Taylor). I wonder what credentials "anonymous" has?

Seeing Mexican Immigration Clearly

In 25 years of research on a variety of public policy issues, I have never seen so much misinformation as in the debate on Mexican immigration during 2006. Thanks to the media and political entrepreneurs, Mexican immigrants are routinely portrayed as a tidal wave of human beings fleeing an impoverished, disorganized nation who are desperate to settle in the United States, where they will overwhelm our culture, displace our language, mooch our social services, and undermine our national security. This profile, however, bears no discernible relationship to the reality that I know as a social scientist. Since 1982 I have co-directed a large data-gathering effort known as the Mexican Migration Project. My collaborators and I have conducted representative surveys in communities all over Mexico and the United States, and over the years, we have surveyed 20,000 households and 120,000 individuals to gather detailed information from U.S. migrants about their experiences crossing the border, living in the United States, and returning to Mexico. My understanding of Mexican immigration rests on these data, and if anyone thinks I’ve got it all wrong, they are free to download the data, analyze it, and see for themselves. Mexican immigration is not a tidal wave. The rate of undocumented migration has not increased in over two decades. Neither is Mexico a demographic time bomb; its fertility rate is only slightly above replacement. Although a variety of trans-border population movements have increased, this is to be expected in a North American economy that is increasingly integrated under the terms of a mutually-ratified trade agreement. Undocumented migration stems from the unwillingness of the United States to include labor within the broader framework governing trade and investment. Rates of migration between Mexico and the United States are entirely normal for two countries so closely integrated economically. To Americans who fear cultural displacement, I say look at what’s happening south of the border. Cultural influences travel in both directions and in an integrated economy they are inevitable. Given the global hegemony of the United States, however, the cultural effects are asymmetric. We influence Mexican culture and society far more than they affect U.S. culture and society. Within Mexico, Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, Toys ‘R Us, and 7-11 are increasingly displacing Mexican outlets. Even Taco Bell is making inroads, and American cultural traditions such as Halloween and Santa Claus now compete with Mexican celebrations such as Day of the Dead and Three Kings Day. Mexican immigrants do not migrate to take advantage of U.S. social services. Their service usage rates are well below those of other immigrant groups and have fallen sharply since the mid-1990s. Undocumented migrants, in particular, are more likely to pay taxes than to use public services, and even those they do use—mainly education and medical care—are consumed at rates well below what one would expect given their socioeconomic characteristics. The problem of paying for services to immigrants is serious, but one that is easily solved through federal transfers. Whereas tax revenues accrue disproportionately to the federal government, the costs of immigration are borne locally. Mexico is not a threat to U.S. national security. It is an ally and friendly trading nation that annually spends less than 0.8% of GDP on its military. There are a million U.S. citizens living in Mexico and ten million Mexicans living in the United States, all of whom have multiple ties of kinship, friendship, and commerce that cross the border. Tourism is extensive and large shares of citizens in both countries have spent time on the other side of the border. Mexico has no resident Islamic community, no known terrorist cells, and has never been a launching pad for terrorist attacks on the United States. Those attributes describe our neighbor to the north, not our neighbor to the south. The demagogic portrayal of Mexico as a threat to American culture, society, and security has not solved the problems associated with Mexico-U.S. migration; it has only made them worse. Rather than seeking to build a wall between our two countries, we should adopt the stance taken by the European Union when it integrated poor neighbors such as Spain and Portugal in the 1980s and Poland and Hungary today. Rather than seeking to block flows of people that naturally follow from trade and investment within a common market, we should work to make sure these movements occur under circumstances that are beneficial to all concerned, promoting growth in Mexico, minimizing costs to the United States, and protecting the rights of immigrant and native workers. (emphasis added)

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: RickSp As this thread is discussing the wisdom of author who would only identify himself as "anonymous" and was first posted on the website of Glenn Spencer, a white supremicist vigilante, I suspect that any response is pretty pointless.

I agree, any response is definitely pointless. No matter what the American public wants, illegal immigration will continue. Our politicians have shown that, despite what the American people want, the border will remain open. Anyway, I'll make a futile gesture of responding to a couple of the professor's points, fully recognizing the pointlessness of doing so.

My collaborators and I have conducted representative surveys in communities all over Mexico and the United States, and over the years, we have surveyed 20,000 households and 120,000 individuals to gather detailed information from U.S. migrants about their experiences crossing the border, living in the United States, and returning to Mexico. My understanding of Mexican immigration rests on these data, and if anyone thinks I’ve got it all wrong, they are free to download the data, analyze it, and see for themselves.

Sure, never mind talking with those AFFECTED by illegal immigration, just talk with those that practice it. This will certainly give a balanced viewpoint about the effects that it has on our culture and standard of living.

The rate of undocumented migration has not increased in over two decades.

"According to the cover story (Time Magazine), illegal immigration into the U.S. has accelerated in the last year, since President Bush proposed a temporary worker program that amounts to a limited amnesty program that would allow millions to remain in the U.S. legally. This year, according to the report, some 3 million more illegal aliens will enter the country – "enough to fill 22,000 Boeing 737-700 airliners, or 60 flights every day for a year. It's the largest wave of illegal immigration into the country since 2001, according to the report, and illegal immigration now represents triple the number of immigrants who enter the country legally. " WorldNetDaily: 3 million illegals to U.S. this year

Cultural influences travel in both directions and in an integrated economy they are inevitable. Given the global hegemony of the United States, however, the cultural effects are asymmetric. We influence Mexican culture and society far more than they affect U.S. culture and society. Within Mexico, Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, Toys ‘R Us, and 7-11 are increasingly displacing Mexican outlets. Even Taco Bell is making inroads, and American cultural traditions such as Halloween and Santa Claus now compete with Mexican celebrations such as Day of the Dead and Three Kings Day.

Nice to know that, while we have overcrowding in our schools (paid for primarily by property taxes - which most illegals don't contribute to), have a crisis in emergency rooms and hospitals because they are filled with illegals, Taco Bell is making inroads in Mexico. Sounds like a bargain to me.

"Overburdened by the uninsured and overwhelmed by illegal immigration (search), public health care in Los Angeles is on life support. Sixty percent of the county's uninsured patients are not U.S. citizens. More than half are here illegally. About 2 million undocumented aliens in Los Angeles County alone are crowding emergency rooms because they can't afford to see a doctor."
FOXNews.com - L.A. Emergency Rooms Full of Illegal Immigrants - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

The problem of paying for services to immigrants is serious, but one that is easily solved through federal transfers. Whereas tax revenues accrue disproportionately to the federal government, the costs of immigration are borne locally.

Well, that's a relief!! The federal government will pay for these services, not the taxpayers. I feel better already. Of course, the tax revenues are a little lower than the costs.

"Illegal alien households are estimated to use $2,700 a year more in services than they pay in taxes, creating a total fiscal burden of nearly $10.4 billion on the federal budget in 2002. Among the largest federal costs: Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion)." Center for Immigration Studies

Mexico is not a threat to U.S. national security.

"The next time you pass through an airport and have to produce a photo ID to establish who you are and then must remove your shoes, take off your belt, empty your pockets, prove your laptop is not an explosive device and send your briefcase or purse through a machine to determine whether it holds weapons, think about this: In a single day, more than 4,000 illegal aliens will walk across the busiest unlawful gateway into the U.S., the 375-mile border between Arizona and Mexico. No searches for weapons. No shoe removal. No photo-ID checks. Before long, many will obtain phony identification papers, including bogus Social Security numbers, to conceal their true identities and mask their unlawful presence." Who Left the Door Open? -- Sunday, Sep. 12, 2004 -- Page 1 -- TIME

Just had a few minutes, so I thought I'd respond, fully aware that in spite of any evidence to the contrary, illegal immigration is actually good for us.

[RickSp]

Fine Z. You listen to the anonymous writer's screed posted on a vigilante site and I'll listen to the scholar who has been studying Mexican immigration for the last twenty five years and has the data to back his conclusions. He is more than a match for the WorldNetDaily or Fox News.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: RickSp Fine Z. You listen to the anonymous writer's screed posted on a vigilante site and I'll listen to the scholar who has been studying Mexican immigration for the last twenty five years and has the data to back his conclusions. He is more than a match for the WorldNetDaily or Fox News.

Yeah, there you go. The scholar must be right, because he's studied a long time and has "data". The anonymous writer must be wrong because he doesn't want to give his name. Doesn't matter what either has to say.

[rmnunez]

The demagogic portrayal of Mexico as a threat to American culture, society, and security has not solved the problems associated with Mexico-US migration; it has only made them worse.

I wholeheartedly agree, Mexico poses no threat to united statian society or security. I don't think the united statians have such a thing as a "culture", but doubt it could be threatened by Mexico either. But I would dispute the fertility situation. I'm no demographer and have no idea what the numbers actually mean, but from what I recall, the anglo birth rate is at 1.8 and the Mexican rate is at 2.8, I also remember replacement rate was at 2.0. If these figures are about right, you can see how it would make a difference.

The scholar must be right, because he's studied a long time and has "data". The anonymous writer must be wrong because he doesn't want to give his name.

Yes, that makes sense, I'd doubt the integrity of one publishing anonymously and would lend credence to the conclusions of long-studied scientists in their field.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Zeebadee Yeah, there you go. The scholar must be right, because he's studied a long time and has "data". The anonymous writer must be wrong because he doesn't want to give his name. Doesn't matter what either has to say.

Wait you left part of it out, "the anonymous writer posting on the white supremacist website must be wrong...." Yah , that works for me.

[brien]

Rather than seeking to block flows of people that naturally follow from trade and investment within a common market, we should work to make sure these movements occur under circumstances that are beneficial to all concerned, promoting growth in Mexico, minimizing costs to the United States, and protecting the rights of immigrant and native workers. (emphasis added)

This is dead on. The achievement of these goals should inlcude forcing all immigrants to enter the US legally through legal channels. This way there are no illegal immigrants.

protecting the rights of immigrant and native workers

The rights of immigrants include all immigrants. The legal immigrants to the US have the right to expect the US and Mexico to enforce all current immigration laws on all immigrants both legal and illegal. New laws should be enacted that eases the restriction of the immigration flow, and increases the border clearing houses, so immigrants aren't forced to turn to illegal means to gain entry into the US.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: RickSp Wait you left part of it out, "the anonymous writer posting on the white supremacist website must be wrong...." Yah , that works for me.

You also left out part of it, "because he doesn't want to give his name. Doesn't matter what either has to say."

Does it still work for you??

[xyzer]

What I would like to know is what the eminent scholar Rick quoted is really thinking about? His points are specious! e.g sure the illegals don't worry about free medical services? They already heard about it?
Sure these people don't worry about free schooling either..they know it's there?
Sure these people don't worry about cultural and linguistic change and citizenship ..they are only here temporarily to make a buck and send it home?
They can't vote and probably dont worry about helping to run their adopted communities because they don't seek permanency? What if there was need for a military draft? Would these illegal citizens fight for our country? could they be drafted? Can they or do they perfom and participate in running the country as we expect citizens to?
To tell me that illegals haven't increased much over the past two decades is nonsense. Ever since President Reagan gave them amnesty the flow has increased..An estimated 20 million such non participating citizens is a problem!
Over 20 percent of some major states prison populations are illegals so they also including a serious criminal element in their secretive migration.and it has an impactt on society generally. Do we need more bad guys to keep track of?
The realtively easy flow of hords of unidentifed immigrants gives terrorist cover to enter and spread in our society and of course it opens up the road to drug trafficking too.These are knowns!
rmnunez says Mexico is doing its part and gves examples...Right on rm! Does that mean the USA should not do its best too? Does that mean that Mexico recognizes a problem exists and Ricks expert if full of it..It being cow pies!