Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [MLUG][Politics]The great immigration wash-out

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 2 May 2006, Rick wrote:

> Mike Miller wrote:
> > I just don't think you guys understand the nature of the problem.
> >
> > (A) we want cheap illegal workers
>
> Who's "we" roundeye?

Would this be more satisfying:  We want cheap labor.

Who is we?  Everyone in the US who buys things made in the US.  Everyone 
in the US who hires unskilled workers.


> The only thing "we" want that I'm aware of is cheap goods/services.

Sure.  Cheap labor provides them.  Cheap illegal workers are a major 
source of such cheap labor.  Are you just trying to waste time or are you 
really unable to figure this out?


> > (B) it is impossibly expensive to round people up and ship them off to 
> > other countries
>
> I think you overstate this cost because it supports your belief.

What belief is that?  I believe that we shouldn't round people up and ship 
them out because I believe it is too expensive, not the other way around.


> > (D) once they get in via C, and they decide to overstay their visits, 
> > you have to deal with A and B:  we don't want them to leave and it 
> > costs too much to kick them out.
>
> This bullet makes no sense.

Of course it makes sense.  What don't you understand about it?  Maybe you 
want them to leave, but they are making your taco or mopping your floor or 
whatever.


> If there were no work here, it would be Mexico. I do agree that we need to 
> stop employing them.

What would be Mexico?  I don't know what that means.


> Yes, it's what "we" want. Perhaps it's not what "you" want. I still 
> disagree with your analysis of the costs involved in maintaining 12 
> million illegal persons within our borders.

This is an important question and I don't know the answer.  Does anyone 
have data on the cost to the government of having undocumented people 
living here?  We have to at least subtract off the benefit to the 
government in terms of the taxes these people pay.


> > I know it seems simpler than it is:  "Illegal" means "illegal" after 
> > all. But we have many years of policy that encourages people to do what 
> > they have been doing.  The occasional amnesty proclamation tells them 
> > "hang in there."  Isn't it ironic that the same people who talk about 
> > rounding them up and shipping them out are also considering giving them 
> > amnesty?  What are these poor immigrants supposed to think?  What is 
> > the message they are hearing?
>
> Get the hell out?

OK, but also "stay a while and you might get amnesty."  Right?  That was 
my point.  Your inability to understand my is really surprising.  I think 
this means that I will have to stop replying to you pretty soon because 
you might be one of those people who just likes to annoy.


> > Listen, I really don't care about these people and I have no problem 
> > with you shipping them all back to where they came from.  It isn't an 
> > emotional thing for me.  I just know that you aren't understanding how 
> > this works.
>
> Is that because you're smarter than us? Or because you have some super 
> duper evidence that you're not sharing with the rest of us? How does you 
> patronizing poor, dumb persons like myself help your argument?

I think it is because I know so many immigrants and even illegal 
immigrants.  They are among my friends here in Minneapolis.  The reason 
that I think some of you don't know what you are talking about has nothing 
to do with how smart I am, it has everything to do with the ridiculous 
things you write to the list.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion