Illegal Immigration Follow-up
I would like to submit a recent Orson Scott Card article as my follow-up to a recent post on illegal immigration. His words could have easily been said by myself (with some minor differences), except with much less eloquence. For the most part, I completely agree with what he says.
My only issue is that of actually “opening” the border. What does that mean? Does it mean that we match restrictions on the northern border and apply them also to the southern border? If so, I’ll vote for that! If it means something more “open” than that, I’m hesitant.
But all in all, well written. I’d like to hear comments from a few others ( here and here ) on this article.
His portrayal of the Mexican-American war was actually tame compared to reality (and unfortunately we wanted to do the same in Cuba and the Philipines).
As for opening the border…I think that it’s a great idea within reason. Anyone with a record free from criminal activity should be allowed to come to the U.S. This would allow the border patrol to do focus on those who will compromise the security and safety of the U.S. The free labor market would find its level and eventually the flow would slow. People would have the opportunities available for growth that our “mostly-free” society provides. The economies of both Mexico and the U.S. would improve.
I also appreciate the way Card identifies the tax issue. People make a big deal about a non-issue. Also with those who use the welfare system. There are statistically more white, multi-generational American individuals who abuse the welfare system (and they don’t pay taxes either).
This really should be non-issue. Fundamentally it is a racial and cultural issue. It has nothing to do with economics (which is the main strawman).
So when you say:
“There are statistically more white, multi-generational American individuals who abuse the welfare system (and they don’t pay taxes either).”
Is that a weighted statistic, meaning, is it a percentage rather than a hard number?
BTW, did you know that 45% of all statistics are made up on the spot?
Yeah, I made it up. You called me on it. 😉 Actually there is a larger percentage of welfare recipients that fall into that category, but also a larger percentage of the population at large that do. My point is that by holding up non-tax paying immigrants who use the welfare system as examples of what’s wrong with illlegal immigration, we ignore the fact that many (again I don’t have numbers, just anecdotal stuff) illegal immigrants stay on welfare rolls for less time than white, multigenerational Americans.
Dan (I mean “Reluctant”)
At my blog at the following post http://www.philosophicponderings.com/2006/03/26/latin-americans-immigrants-conservative-or-liberal/#more-8
I have a couple of comments include links for statistics and a reasonable discussion of the welfare issues of immigration.
I completely agree with you. I was just wondering if you had real statistics (which you do — linked to from your comments on your blog).
Even with these statistics, it doesn’t make sense to use that (“they’re all on welfare”) as an argument against illegal immigration. They can’t even get government help (including welfare), so how could that be an argument. In fact, it should be an (albeit stupid) argument *for* illegal immigration as it makes it so they *cannot* get welfare.
Actually, Reluctant, there are illegal immigrants who are able to access the welfare system quite easily via fake identification, etc.
Ahh… didn’t think of that. Now that’s lame! Send them all back!
Just kidding of course.
This article has some interesting information about taxes and cost, but also about the entrpreneurial spirit of Latino immigrants. Really a hopeful article.