Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants

Thumper wrote:

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 14:47:23 -0500, Alan Lichtenstein <arl@xxxxxxx>
wrote:


Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

Alan Lichtenstein wrote:


As I initially asserted, when both Republicans and Democrats, liberals
and conservatives, Bush apologists and Bush haters, find themselves on
the same page of this issue, then Congress ought to stand up and take
notice. We need to severely criminalize illegal border crossings, round
up these illegals and promptly deport them. The anguished cries of the
so-called do-gooders in various churches, not withstanding.


Krugman's argues the loss in wages (8 percent) amongst American
high-school dropouts do not justify the overall increase to our economy
(less than 1 percent) brought about by the 10+ million illegal
immigrants. That's persuasive.

However, Krugman isn't arguing that we should round up the illegals and
deport them. He rejects the House bill, describing it as "simply
immoral" because it "among other things, make it a criminal act to
provide an illegal immigrant with medical care." He also said
"realistically, we'll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill
immigrants."

I didn't see anything in the article that indicates that he rejects The House Bill. Methinks you're seeing things, Josh. And you're right. He didn't make the suggestion that we round them up. He didn't have to. That action is now obvious.



I whole heartedly disagree. We are not and cannot "round them up."

We can round them up quite easily. Their shape up centers are well known in each community, and if they aren't, I'm certain there are enough good citizens to inform INS of where they are. All that needs be done is have an INS vehicle at each shape up street corner on a given morning and you can clean out an entire community of illegals in a morning. Put them on a plane for Mexico and they'll be home by evening. The only problem is that we don't have sufficient plane space for 10 million of them, so it might take a few days. But we'll get them all.

I am guessing that Krugman believes if we started from scratch and
legally provided for the "correct" number of Mexican immigrants, we
would still allow a much larger number into the USA than current law
permits - even though it would not be as large as 10 million.

Don't guess what he might believe in order to provide you with some rationalization for your failed position. Fact remains, Josh, that once the economic factor is disabused from the debate, there is simply NO, repeat, NO basis for these individuals to remain in The United States.
Criminalizing that action will increase enforcement, and subsequent deportations.


Krugman's solution is to slow the rate of growth (border control?) so
that we reach that number in the future. Implied in this approach is
giving legal status to most of the current illegals.

Another liberal, Robert Reich
(http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11364),
echoes some of these beliefs with an emphasis on enforcing labor laws
to maintain wage rates.

Why stop there? Why not also attack the problem at the source, the illegals themselves?


That isn't the source. The source is the employers. No job to be
had, no illegal immigration.

Wrong. These 'employers' don't advertise in Mexico for coolies to come here and work for slave wages. They came here all by themselves FIRST. And got taken advantage of. If you crack down on those 'employers' and reduce the number of jobs, that isn't going to stop the felons from coming here. And it certainly isn't going to do anything about those who are here already, draining our economy, as Krugman has now agreed.

I don't say that we should ignore those 'employers.' We should fine them to the hilt, because they're profiting at the expense of our social security and our higher tax burden. And they should be made to pay us back. But we still also have to remove the source of labor that drives them. In short, we need to do BOTH. Because BOTH are variables that contribute to the problem, and addressing only one is addressing the problem half way. And half way solutions have a tendency to become half assed solutions, which are never effective. In short, you can't solve the problem if you allow them to remain here.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... and conservatives, Bush apologists and Bush haters, find themselves on ... up these illegals and promptly deport them. ... immigrants. ... He rejects the House bill, ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... As I initially asserted, when both Republicans and Democrats, liberals ... and conservatives, Bush apologists and Bush haters, find themselves on ... up these illegals and promptly deport them. ... immigrants. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... and conservatives, Bush apologists and Bush haters, find themselves on ... up these illegals and promptly deport them. ... immigrants. ... Methinks you're seeing things, Josh. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... and conservatives, Bush apologists and Bush haters, find themselves on ... immigrants. ... since Krugman alludes that they are actually a long term detriment. ... giving legal status to most of the current illegals. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... I suspect Republicans are going to lose on this issue big time. ... We need to severely criminalize illegal border crossings, round ... up these illegals and promptly deport them. ... immigrants. ...
    (soc.retirement)