Yes, Americans WOULD Take These Jobs: thoughts on immigration

Speaking as a line cook, I can tell you that many Americans would love to have a job like mine, or as a canner or an assembly line worker, if it actually paid the bills. but since you'd need to work two or more of those kinds of jobs full time to make enough to approach earning a living wage, many just give up and sign up for welfare or work for Wal-Mart....or they go ahead and take the multiple-job option, and end up having NO free time, NO time to start a family, NO time to look for a better job, and still risk falling into homelessness or bankruptcy should an unexpected mediacl or financial crisis occur.

This is wrong. It shouldn't be like this.

In 1968, a father could work as a canner or a cook or a janitor and bring home enough money to feed a family of four, and still have free time to indulge his hobbies on the weekend. That same father, today, would be working two full time jobs, plus sending his wife out to work, plus send his firstborn out into the workforce as soon as labor laws would allow, just to have enough to pay rent and maybe a bill or two. He has to cut out all amenities, all free time, and be a virtual slave to that paycheck.

Does anyone else not think of the phrase "American Dream" when talking about this?

Something that never gets talked about, either, is the huge underclass of artists out there, creative people with talents in music, film, literature, visual art, etc., who would snap up a janitor job or (like me) a cook job in a heartbeat in order to finance their art. However, Starbuck's, Wal-Mart, The Gap, McDonald's, etc, don't see these people as wage-earners, they see them as throw-away labor, temps who shall be jettisonned as soon as possible.

We've lost an entire generation of lower-middle -class and working-class artists/musicians/etc because of this.

From my own experience, I can honestly say that Americans WOULD take those gross, yucky, working-class jobs...if those employers could guarantee a wage that they could live on. Not asking for a fortune, but a level of pay commensurate with the severity of the labor would be acceptable. Paying 11 bucks an hour to be a full-time line cook wouldn't send ANY restaurant owner into bankruptcy. Do they expect us to live five families to a house, working two or more back-breaking jobs at once with no insurance each, just to stay one step ahead of homelessness?

Yes.

The rub is that we can't compete with Mexican immigrants in this area because we're not willing to make the sacrifices they do. These people work incredibly hard and NEVER complain. (They ought to start!) All my immigrant friends at these jobs all take it as a given that they work 18 hours a day with no break, no insurance, no hope of advancement. And the owners and managers seem okay with this arrangement too. I'm willing to do the work, and I have in the past....not everyone is comfortable with that level of profitless commitment. The Americans who work in food service all have to have years and years of experience, hold a culinary degree, be willing to work 15 hour days every day, and few of us (some chefs do, anyways) earn a living wage, unlike our Mexican colleagues, who earn a few bucks less than us (since they're unskilled) an hour...but we do earn enough to pay the rent and keep a few bill collectors at bay for a month or two. Sometimes we have enough to buy a few CD's or some other type of entertainment. I'm lucky enough to have sufficient free time to keep a band together and read DU on my days off.

But is that really "lucky?" A couple of decades ago, ALL Americans would have accepted that as their due.

There's a certain romance to the "bootstraps" claptrap that makes many Americans swoon, bend over, and willingly accept any and all hardship their bosses and masters at the top may want to fuck them with. I've had arguments with rightist coworkers about this stuff, who throw talking points at me like:

"Where in the Constitution does it say that everyone has a right to free health care?"

or:

"See, the problem is that you want SOMETHING FOR NOTHING, JUST LIKE ALL LIBERALS."

or:

"If they raise our wages, they'll have to also raise the price of the food to cover it....and if we all got a living wage, the cost of goods would rise."

In other words, "Keep fucking my ass harder, Mr. Corporation Man! Make it bleed! And don't use lube next time!"

Why do some Americans think that we don't deserve to live in the same kind of peaceful, proserous democracy that most first world countries enjoy? Why DO the poor keep voting against their own interests; not just vote against, why do they internalize bullshit rightist talking points like those above to assuage their own angst? I have no idea. (BTW, to the guy who asked about free health care being in the Constitution, I replied, "Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that CEO's of giant multinationals have the right to give themselves million-dollar severance packages...nor does it say anything about invading and occupying sovereign nations halfway across the world who are in possession of natural resources we want...but that's neither here nor there.") Economists like Paul Krugman and others have argued that a short-term wealth increase at the bottom would give the economy the boost it needs and help everyone at all levels, since the poor could finally afford goods made my the "job creators" on top. Why not give it a shot? Shit, we all know trickle down ain't working. (Just admit it, freeps. It doesn't work.)

The corporations, small businesses, and other institutions who keep the profits at the top afloat on a sea of cheap, sometimes illegal, labor, should take a look around at the economic devastation they're causing. All the statistics about "underemployment" are hiding a dirty little secret.

In any case, the next time some asshole on TV says, "Immigrants are taking jobs no American would do," they're lying. Don't accept that frame!

I have a graduate degree and about 15 years in the workforce, yet I am living paycheck to paycheck (I live in NYC, where my salary, which would be decent in most other places, leaves me nothing left over to save or even go on vacation or shopping - I buy one thing I need every pay check.) I am beginning to feel that life isn't worth the effort it takes to live it.

but when we argue this truth, we are called communists- and told this is a 'republic' not a 'democracy'-

I couldn't agree more with what you say-


And to the person asking where in the constitution it addresses the right to health care- the EQUAL right to health care is in the preamble-
"We hold these truths to be self evident- that ALL men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among those are LIFE- (not to the rich alone) LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT of happiness-(hard to do if you are dying of cancer, and cannot get treatment without bankrupting your children- leaving them homeless and without a parent)"

Trickle down does work though-
the people at the bottom are the ones who get pissed on.
And are kept down under the heels of those who stand on them.


What bush is pushing is the return of the sweat-shop laborer- and the recruiting of 'slaves' in the guise of 'guest workers'-

So the corporations can get fatter and fatter.

And as I read it, something struck me: Corporations WANT those cheap laborers to remain ILLEGAL, because they're less likely to complain that way. Hell, they'd prefer us ALL to behave that way -- afraid of complaining (don't turn me into Immigration, Mr. Boss Man, please!), willing to accept any wage, not expecting any benefits.

I'm a 47-year-old single working woman. I don't own a home and I'm having to face the fact that I may never own one. I also fear that I may never attain the standard of living my parents enjoyed, and end up as the first member of my family to DO WORSE than my forebearers. I've basically worked hard and played by the rules -- I've never resorted to "creative" tax preparers or unethical behavior to get ahead, which I guess in this era of cronyism, resume padding and cutthroat, often unfair competition makes me a fool.

What "American Dream"?

I worked for a restaurant in Nashville that had to fire a Mexican prep cook who, as it turned out, had stolen someone's social security number to use as his own.

I asked the chef how much he made. The reply: "Eight-fifty an hour."

He had been there three years. No raise in that time. I was making a buck more an hour than him, and it was one of two fullt-time jobs I was holding down at the time.

At what point does President McKinley's ghost come floating out of the White House roof, flinging benedictions at his rightful heirs and smiling beatifically?

It's coyotes selling a commodity from the back of a van. Such 'commodities' are ALWAYS cheaper to the buyer: companies buying illegal goods.

If we're to open the borders, then we MUST enact a Federal Livable Wage Law!! It becomes an imperative! When employers can no longer pay less (unless they extort a kickback) for the labor of a illegal immigrant, they'll stop hiring them!

I'm not one to blame immigrants for anything, they're being exploited like most corporations WISH they could exploit everyone else.

It's just incredibly sad that they see this level of hardship as an improvement over what they face at home in Mexico and Ecuador and Honduras and.....

completely that they are not to blame- In my area, many farm laborers come for the fall harvest year after year- most from Jamaica, the Bahamas working from before daylight to after dark trying to harvest the apples- shelter is often a tent or tee-pee that some of us left over hippies adopted to make ends meet during a chosen break from the 'traditional rat race'.
Sad thing is, farm laborers, immigrants and born-here's alike are exempted from most all kinds of protections against workplace abuses- Many of the pickers i used to know, could make enough money to last them several months back home,-(even after sending home money while they worked) including travel expenses back in the 80's when i worked along side them.

I don't blame the folks being used, and abused by the powerful- all they're (we're) doing is trying to stay alive.

And your post is a great one- glad to nominate it as well-

in SW Missouri, Tyson and Simmons (chicken plants) use a lot of illegals, primarily hispanics....I don't blame the folks either...

because American benefits are too great, but because foreign labor protections are too little - this applies to immigrants as well.

... then the wages reflect exploitation and profiteering rather than compensation. (Let's work hard at understanding how our very language has been corrupted.) Almost all employers (mis)use the term 'compensation' to describe the wages workers receive for sacrificing their freedom and labor for the benefit of others. But it's really NOT 'compensation' - not compensation for time that could otherwise be spent with spouse, child, or parent; not compensation for time spent endangering one's self in the daily bum's rush on pothole-riddled highways with other road-rageoholics; not compensation for enduring abuse from bosses rather than getting fresh air and exercise in a park; not compensation for surrendering a portion of one's very life.

Instead of being 'compensation' it's systemic extortion. The average worker in the S&P500 receives 'compensation' that's about 1/3rd of the value of their labor. Why? Because the attitude is one of 'supply and demand' - which is totally illicit. That's the heart of commoditization - treating labor as a commodity and pricing it in accordance with that treatment. It's an evil that's become banal. Employers are glad to extort labor from workers based on 'supply and demand' but cry bloody murder when labor unionizes to level the playing field.

U.S. Code : Title 15 : Section 17
Antitrust laws not applicable to labor organizations

The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce. Nothing contained in the antitrust laws shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for the purposes of mutual help, and not having capital stock or conducted for profit, or to forbid or restrain individual members of such organizations from lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the antitrust laws.

I think I just got myself a new sigline!

:thumbsup:

Great post, BTW....I always enjoy your posts.

when you measure success in the healthcare business as dollars (as the HMO's do) you're missing the real point. The quality of your insurance company should be measured on how healthy you're customers are!

(and not because you're screening them heavily and denying those most in need coverage)

"Commodities" that are the very fabric of our life (i.e. our time/labor, our intellect, our health) should not be treated in the same manner as a cup of coffee. To me, they're much more important than that!

When I say I'm a subscriber to deontological ethics, it is maxims such as this that give purchase to my stance.

Indeed, maxims such as this can be extended to the macro-economics of corporatism, I believe. It is perpetually claimed that the justification for corporate profits is grounded in risk - risk of loss. Yet when corporations obtain 'corporate welfare' in the form of bail-outs under the threat of 'national security' then the ethical basis for their existence as a for-profit enterprise is totally de-legitimized. At that point, such enterprises should be nationalized and their 'owners' be compensated proportionally for the book value of their net assets only. If the net is negative, the 'owners' are due NOTHING - and that's the liability limitation of incorporation. Market capitalization then becomes completely meaningless - being a sheer fiction in any event.

They built 3 houses behind me and not one of the crew spoke English, and most days there were Tecate (quart size)bottles all over the place and they would sing Spanish songs at the top of their lungs. I wouldn't want to buy any one of the houses which are selling in the high 800k's. It's not just the picking fruit jobs, it's all of them.

K & R.

We live on one paycheck to feed a family of five, a choice we made in order to try to offer our kids a more quality upbringing. I tell you, it is beyond difficult, and we are in debt to an uncomfortable degree right now (school loans-my SO is trying to complete a Master's Degree for future improved employment).

Even so, neither of us have much time beyond family life, work, grad. school and the demands that the kid's schools and activities present. Most of the activities that we can enjoy, of course, require that we be frugal. No more movies or restaurant excursions; it's the park, picnics and hiking for us. (which is great, actually, but I do enjoy seeing a good movie on the big screen now and then, and I'd like my kids to experience that, too. The last time we all went, though, it cost a fortune!)

I hadn't really thought about some of the points you made specifically. Every so often, though, I do think back to the 60's when I was a kid, when my Dad worked a basic job and Mom stayed home, raising five kids. Things seemed much easier for them, with nary a concern about whether Mom was going to have to go get a job to supplement the income. In our situation, each month we teeter on whether to put the kids in daycare and both work full-time (which, now with three kids, really isn't much of an option because of the daycare costs which nullify the extra-earned income). Oh, I'm sure Mom and Dad worried about money, and things were probably tight now and then. But, to me, it seems much more complicated for us than it was for them.

Sometimes freepers talk shit about going to school to get a degree to get a better job when they hear people complain about this shit. But would YOU want to incur that kind of deabt if you knew there was no guarantee it'd ever be paid off, and if you knew you'd be paying it off the rest of your life? I'm stuck between work and school right now; I'd love to return to school to finish my bachelor's, but I'd be in an even worse financial crisis should I decide to, having to pay back student loans.

Sometimes rightists don't realize how much their connections and their luck brings them...most think they made it on their own.

Forget fascism...Is it feudalism yet?

consolidated, and locked in at a low rate--this past August I think was the deadline. But the last few thousand dollars will be at a higher rate, no doubt.

I am not looking forward to re-paying these school loans. But, the decision for the higher degree was made a couple of years ago (almost 3, actually) It seemed the right thing to do at the time under our circumstances. Hope it all pays off in the long run.

is the best sentence in your post.

Because it doesnt, and because of this; Americans arent willing.
I lived in Az the last five years seeing up front and personal. if there is someone is willing to work for shit, there is a company who wants to pay em,.

Implement single-payer healthcare (this is the only issue I know where citizens & business' interests are overlayed so perfectly--so it IS "doable") AND mandate a 32 hour workweek.

Presto! Voila! An extra several MILLION decent jobs in the US.

When any American can actually afford to live on the wages paid, and all employers are required to actually compensate people for their very lives, then illegal immigrants will find far, far fewer employers willing to hire them in lieu of a citizen or permanent resident.

bubbling in the anti-immigration movement while simultaneously boosting the economy and giving liberaism a shot in the arm.

Trouble is, the far-too-powerful "libertarian" wing of the GOP would be mighty pissed, and many corporate honchos would raise a stink for a few months. But after they saw the GIGANTIC profit they'd turn from so many people finally having a bit of disposable income to throw their way, their minds would have to change.

Ah, the dreams dreamers dream!

I don't have anything to add, but this is the best thread I've seen in GD in quite a while.

... I think it's a grave error to ascribe racism to those who oppose the lax enforcement of immigration laws. After all, what's it called when ten million people illegally cross the border of a neighboring nation? I call that an invasion. :shrug: I call the domestic employers who exploit such people traitors and criminals.

I'd love to live in Tahiti, but their immigration laws wouldn't allow it. (One must either adopt a Tahititan or marry a Tahitian to be permitted to immigrate there.) I'd like to live in New Zealand, but the immigration laws there make it nearly impossible for me.

Molly Ivins had a great editorial in this month's issue of The Progressive about the connection between GM's crisis and the lack of healthcare. Well worth a read.

Oh, and those are great suggestions, BTW.

I wish we could make some powerful politicians work a week in a mine shaft or in a caterer's kitchen or on a construction site or in a garbage truck or as a teacher under the same protections and conditions we work under right now...just a week, that's all I ask...

Lavorare meno, lavorare tutti!

Work less, and everybody works. Having fewer and fewer people making more and more stuff is just plain not sustainable if you also stipulate that the displaced people don't get to have any of the stuff.

It astounds me that the Mexican government has not made a fuss over the US allowing Mexicans to work illegally. It amazes me that we have not raised a fuss since I feel illegal Mexicans, working in the US, are just basically paid slaves.

These people have no rights and are put in jeopardy by not being able to speak up due to their status.

If the government really felt we needed these folks to do jobs we would not then they need to protect the rights of people around the entire world by granting work permits. This would enable these folks to earn a decent wage, have a safer working environment and be able to speak out against injustices in the work place.

The government tries to play both sides. On one hand they say illegal immigrants are bad and we need to protect our borders. They say this to try and win over their base. Then they speak out of both sides of their mouth by saying they do jobs no one else will. This is playing up to the business people who want that nice cheap labor to increase their bottom line.

I am insulted that we still, to some degree, allow slavery in this country. Everyone deserves better than this. What has our country come to?

demgurl

The parallels are striking: the same disregard for the labor force, the same rampant wealth at the top, the same drive to push religion as a salve to the working person's wounds instead of adequate working conditions.....A new gilded age.

It's gonna take a million Emma Goldmans to enact a change, especially when so many people are just too tired to fight.

What is the Mexican government doing/not doing to or for their citizens, that their citizens feel compelled to risk their safety to sometimes sneak into this country, just to work as virtual slaves?

Is the Mexican government trying to do ANYTHING for its own citizens? Somehow I doubt it.

I hope Lopez-Obrador wins next time around. Last I heard, they had released him from jail. (It just figures that a guy who was not favored by the powers-that-be would end up jailed by them. Only other place I've ever seen that happen is Alabama--where the repukes in charge are going out of their way to repeatedly file spurious indictments against the democratic party frontrunner for the governor's race.)

Government for the wealthy, by the wealthy. It's very feudal.

The serfs have a higher standard of living in the United States, but the vast majority of us are still serfs.

(I'm mostly just kicking this excellent thread.)

Muslims, gays, atheists... and maybe some others I forget.

I'm old enough to remember how the "computer revolution" was supposed to create a better lifestyle for Americans. It would become a "paperless" society and we'd all be working a 24 hour work week-gee whiz!

In many cases, extended families(and friends) are all living under one roof and sharing the expenses. Can you imagine the outcry if American citizens started doing this to cut costs?? Out here in the suburbs where I live, there's zoning laws that prohibit more than 3 registered cars in each driveway, for one. I'm sure that if the neighbors started seeing many people coming in and out of my house on a daily basis, the town would be stepping in quick!

I don't have a problem with anyone trying to better themselves, in fact I applaud the stamina, intelligence and determination it takes nowadays to do so. But, I don't like the exploitation of the illegal alien's status-and the implied message it sends, "we'll let you stay here as long as you'll work for pennies on the dollar-and do the work "we" don't want to do".

I agree that we need some "trickle up" changes. But, I'm not holding my breath for the 24 hour workweek anymore.

He owned a house and car, his wife stayed home, they sent two kids to college, and neither of them had to work at McDonald's in order to survive after retirement.

I went to grade school with classmates whose fathers worked on assembly lines. They, too, lived a middle class lifestyle.

This ties in with the thread I started yesterday - people who are well-off financially seem to negate all these other factors that keep them in their nice comfortable lifestyles, while the rest of us struggle to stay afloat (to greater or lesser degree).

Lately all the stories I'm reading are reminding me of the Gilded Age all over again. And just think about how that era came to a crashing end. This is not good for America.

Thank you!!

with the paycheck coming from a job that doesn't require a huge amount of education is all but over which is very sad. Great post.

Whenever a talking head or a friend or a politician says: "....jobs that Americans won't do" ask them to "finish the sentence".

Then during their baffled stare, finish it for them "...jobs that Americans won't do for a poverty wage".

It's simple and quick and conveys an entire editorial of meaning instantly.

Please steal this idea.

Out of all the loathsome things Bush has uttered I was particularly discusted with this one. Some of us still do these jobs and are thankful for them. I'd like to consider myself one of those lost artists. I was a radio professional. Got downsized pretty much as soon as Bush seized power (9/11). I own a video production company/one man advertising agency that can't make enough money so I just went back to work at a call center for 7 bucks and hour (just a hair above minimum in NY) It's easy and it's helping to fund my art but I'm usually too burned out to accomplish much of it. That and I don't see my wife for 5 days at a time now but hey, who needs a sex life? Sorry. Shadow pity party over now.

And agree that we can't accept the frame that "Immigrants are taking jobs Americans won't do". I've been pointing out the total exploitation on both sides of the border for months around here and have heard that frame as an argument around here time and time again. It's frustrating and aggravating because that frame is just so much garbage!

If we don't fight for our jobs and our wages WHO WILL? I don't see Bush or the rethugs or the corporations or Congress doing jack for us. They could give a damn about anyone else just as long as they have their perks like nice homes and cars and stacks of green in the bank. We, the middle class, working poor and poor MUST stand up to what they are doing to us...otherwise we ALL will be working for peanuts and living like dogs while being told that we are lucky to have anything at all! :puke:

:thumbsup:

For it certainly deserves it.

I have worked with developmentally disabled adults for 18 years now. It is a stressful job, both physically and mentally. When I started I was making a little bit over minimum wage, and 18 years later I am making not quite $4 per hour over what I made when I started. The entire time I've worked in this field it has been necessary for me to work continuous overtime, or a second job at least part-time to survive. For the last four years I've been working two full-time jobs, the second one in mental health.

If either of my jobs paid enough to live on I'd likely stay in the field. However I've become so overworked from needing to work overtime and/or multiple jobs that I've become burned out. Therefore I'm looking forward to getting my graduate degree and moving into another field that pays a living wage.

I have worked retail, fast food and human services, among other jobs. I am a Caucasian American. The jobs are not beneath me, but the pay is not fit for anyone to live on.

"We've lost an entire generation of lower-middle -class and working-class artists/musicians/etc because of this."

Something for the older folks to think about the next time you can't bear to turn on the radio, visit a record store, rent a video, etc....

But whatever, check any poll, the bases and and majorities of both parties are united and incensed about illegals and have been for some time.

...(I'm a translator - it's exhausting and stressful)

but those outfits don't pay enough to even rent a studio for that kind of work. If these businesses would pay a living wage, Americans would be lining up for those jobs.

And illegal aliens should not be blamed for the greedy Americans who hire them to work for a pittance, or our government's failure to enforce the border.

Bush's prescription for a border crackdown would be all right if he actually intended to do it, but I doubt that he does, and his plans to give out work permits to foreigners will only exacerbate the problem of too-low wages.

ALWAYS NO to CHEAP LABOR, ALWAYS.

LIVING WAGE, NOW!

I just finished reading Grapes of Wrath and the people who were wiped out during the Depression went through the same thing. California fruit growers sent out fliers asking for help and promising good wages. When they got out there there was very little work and all the desperate folks let the growers pay slave wages at best.

Of course the locals hated these Okies because they drove down wages. Only the big boys profited from the arrangement. Organized labor, labor laws, Social Security, and the inheritance tax sure do get in the way off these same characters becoming the slave owners they long to be.

I saw some Cato nerd on TV yesterday talking about these jobs Americans don't want and he mentioned cleaning floors in Wal-Mart. I wish someone would have reminded him of the thousands of people who applied for the few hundred jobs at the Wal-Mart in California. Then he said something about outsourcing the good jobs and in sourcing the lower-paying jobs being good for us -- how?

If these employers are so desperate for workers, let them pay a competitive wage. If that means they need to charge a bit more for their product they should work to be more completive there. Look at the upscale department stores. They charge a lot and are doing quite well. But we all know, that's not what this is about. They want to pay little because they want huge profits for the boys at the top and their bought-and-paid-for politicians.

About immigrants taking jobs that no American would want. People are so brainwashed about this it is insane. I have a Brother in law who is working part time, for minimum wage, because he loves the town that he is in. He has to rely on his80 year old dad to help him with food, housing and other basics. I suppose that people like him should just "get a real job" in some hellhole because the pukes say that is the way it should work.

That was the impetus behind this thread. "Jobs no American would do:" It's a total RW frame. Shame on NPR, the supposed "liberal" voice in the media. They ought to know better.

Americans will do just about any work if the money is right. People just want a living wage as you described. Things around the SC Upstate are pretty bad, 6.9% is the official unemployment rate, I'd swear it's at least 2% higher. Now people here can rail about stupid racist christofacist in the South getting what they deserve but a whole lot of the working poor/working class are black, and they are hurting. Many jobs that formerly provided marginally decent wages are now filled to a large degree by immigrants. These include roofing, dry wall, general and road construction. It is particularly hard on former mill workers used to decent wages and job security. There is only so much demand for lawn service and detailing shops, the resort of many with few other choices.

A mandated living wage for all workers along with strict enforcement of employers is necessary. The Democratic Party needs to get out front on this or it's going to get hammered with fear and racism, as usual.

The other thing is the behavior of American corporations overseas. By whatever mechanisms they must be persuaded to provide living wages to their overseas employees. That should help raise wages generally. Nafta and Gatt must be superceded by a return to bilateral agreements. Immigration is not something that people do on a whim, given a decent alternative most folks will prefer to stay home.

Cripes.

:hi:

jobs and on roads, and employers like to hire them because they don't have to pay them as much as they would Americans. I'm sure it's the same in other states too.

The problem is not the immigrants--legal or otherwise, but the employers. Of course the powerful want the average Americans to blame the immigrants.

"Where in the Constitution does it say that everyone has a right to free health care?"

People saying that really pisses me off. The ones who say it, I've observed, are always people who are covered by Medicare or who are--so far--lucky enough to have group medical insurance. When they lose that, they'll be singing a different tune.

Some posters here mentioned the Mexican government and why doesn't it do something. The Mexican government, I'm sure, is glad to have their citizens coming here to work for higher wages than they can get in Mexico, and sending a lot of that money home to their families, to be spent in Mexico and help out their economy. Hell, the Mexican government probably wishes more of its citizens would come here. Another benefit for the Mexican government is that this emigration from Mexico lessens the likelihood of social unrest.

Think about this: suppose those of us here who are under/unemployed could work in Canada and get what we considered a "good job." Would the US government have a problem with that? Not unless they needed those who left for cannon fodder.

Citizens spend their earnings in the local community; aliens send their
earnings home. Aliens can live a lot cheaper than citizens can, too.

The few dollars they can save, which look pitiful when you consider spending them in the US, become quite yummy when converted to pesos and sent to Mexico.

For that same reason, making a trip to the US or Europe is extremely difficult for me. My comfortable middle-class salary becomes a slave wage when brought into rich countries.

He said "instead of a wall, let's just pass a law saying that anyone caught employing an illegal immigrant gets an automatic 1 year in jail. CEO, farmer, whoever. Stops illegal immigration dead in its tracks."

The guy representing the "build the wall" organization was stopped dead. He agreed it would stop immigration, but, but, but...um, oh, it wouldn't stop TERRORISTS!! 9/11!!!

I like figuring out ways to leverage "their issues" to bring up ours. Here's how to move the game from immigration to healthcare -- a bit of framing jujitsu.

The cost of "sending them all back" would be $40 Billion annually.... enough money to finance universal healthcare. Implementing Universal Health Care would probably help generate far more jobs than the 10 million estimated to be filled by undocumented workers.

Making it easier to achieve legal status looks better and better when compared to cost of deporting.

From Myths and Facts about Universal Healthcare:

"...The cost of serving the newly insured would be about $18 billion. The cost of providing additional services to the currently insured-due to elimination of co-pays and deductibles-would be about $46 billion."

BTW. Most people don't know that about 40% of undocumented workers entered legally. Their visas have expired, but many of these are in process of extending. They are in a sort of limbo state. The image of all our undocumented workers coming in illegally, over the borders, is wrong.

References

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/07/26/the-high-cost-of-deportation

http://www.amsa.org/uhc/myths.cfm

I often worry about the rhetoric we use in our attacks on Corporate America in our communications. Your points are important, and I don't mean to single out your post as problematic, but your analysis does include the types of attacks that are common in our rhetoric.

Americans value enterprise (industrious activity, initiative, willingness to take risk). Like it or not, Corporate America is associated with enterprise.

I find that generalized attacks on Corporate America tend to unnecessarily turn people off. Exclusive focus on corporate abuses also tends to elicit a sense of victimization. Sure, we're being victimized, but fighting back requires empowering rhetoric.

Defining problems is a first step, but action is more likely if our complaints are embedded in an empowering context. Some messages that illustrate what I mean.

We are committed to true individual freedom, which cannot exist without freedom from fear of economic hardship.

We know that a vigorous private sector cannot exist if work is not valued.

We know that economic security requires access to quality education and medical care.

We know how critical those first months are in the life of a child; we know paid family leave benefits all of us.

We know that private industry can only flourish and create prosperity for all when the power of the people to protect their interests is embodied in strong public institutions.

We speak for a vast majority of Americans, but the public institutions that enable our demands to become reality have become dysfunctional.

We ARE the government. We can do better. We will be heard.

Notes: “Corporate” and “corporation” are very loaded terms that evoke different images and feelings in different people. Such loaded labels should be avoided. I prefer “private sector”. “Government” is also very loaded, and in many contexts public sector is less likely to evoke such individualized response. Because the word Government is not going anywhere, we need to hammer the right definition. The message "We are the Government" is a critical one.


On Edit: If you are in "demonizing" mode -- which can be useful -- personalize it by saying "Corporate CEOs"... People are much more open to focusing anger on other people.

Lakoff's analyses of metaphor in thinking, framing, and conservative vs. liberal world views are important. I was thrilled when "Don't Think of and Elephant" started getting some attention.

The ideas he presents on conservative vs. liberal thinking have certainly shaped my thinking, but I tend to make more use of a different typology: Knowledge people vs. Belief people. If you're interested, a post of mine on the subject in July got picked as one of tabletalk's posts of the week (mine is last entry on the page, under "White House"). The discussion continued here

economic model.


Nice words, slappy!

Although...what you suggest is....(gasp) SOCIALISM!!!!!


AAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHH!!!!!

I'm a socialist

Well said!

That kind of B.S. is used by both sides and it pisses me off, coming from a small town, where many people rely on these so-called jobs nobody will do here......Sorry this is a very big issue for me.