|
Post by psychecc on May 19, 2006 17:41:28 GMT -6
I sent a version of this post to various Senators and Congressional Representatives. Though many disagree with my view, I welcome debate on the topic. I should mention that I am not an expert on the economy and admit I may have some of the details wrong. Feel free to offer education if you like.
My husband and I, along with many of our friends, have been watching the immigration debate with great interest. I write today to inform you that though my husband has a good paying job, we have not shared in the often touted "booming economy." We are not suffering, but we fail to understand the massive redistribution of wealth to the few, very rich, not just through tax cuts, but also through everyday government policy and legislation. The term "corporatocracy" aptly describes our view that government has abdicated responsibility for the welfare of the nation in favor of big business campaign donors.
I'm 45 and have never felt more betrayed by my government. Who is left to work for the interests of the middle class? This used to be the domain of the democrats, but any cursory glance at congressional voting records shows this is no longer true. Who do you think will be left to buy goods and services when the middle class becomes the underclass?
This brings me to my point. My husband and I are WILL NEVER AGAIN VOTE for anyone who works against our interests, driving middle class wages down, increasing crowding and home prices, etc., by supporting increased immigration, much less offering "earned citizenship" (which is in fact earned amnesty) to illegal aliens. THERE IS NO JOB AN AMERICAN WON'T DO, only jobs employers won't pay an American to do.
The solution is very simple, as you well know. ENFORCE STRICT, COSTLY SANCTIONS AGAINST EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS. The rest of the problem will solve itself.
Please stop allowing illegal aliens and corporations to gut the wages of the middle class. You are, after all, a democrat.
Very seriously yours,
P.S. As I am not a corporate donor, I'll await your FORM LETTER reply.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on May 20, 2006 0:29:45 GMT -6
PsycheCC,
Thanks for your post. I'm in 100% agreement with you. I'm not voting for anyone again who favors "guest workers" or "earned amnesty." Corporate America has done everything within its power to suppress wages and worker income. Now some Democrats want to jump on the Corporate assistance bandwagon, by claiming they're concerned about the wellbeing of illegal aliens. But they're not at all concerned. However, it does make for good talking points while they're accept campaign donations from the Corporate cheap labor lobby.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 18, 2006 21:10:32 GMT -6
What is your alternative to a guest worker program? Having business enforce employment regulations independently? A good guest worker program is the only practical solution to our situation. I'd like to see the stats that show that illegals picking fruit have hurt middle class wages. You are not going to vote for anyone who does not support middle class interests. Well then you are just voting for a politician who is impractical because "independent enforcement" is unrealistic and hard to keep track of without a large increase in bureacracy.
If you are right, and I agree, that nothing is more attractive to a businessman than a cost efficiency, then illegal cheap labor is a means. And the shrewd businessman will take advantage of supply without mind for the middle class. Now is it practical to yell for strict sanctions. No. An efficient guest worker program is the only sound solution.
|
|
sandy
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by sandy on Jun 19, 2006 6:43:04 GMT -6
Here's the scoop on the Bush Immigration plan. labudget.lsu.edu/4969story.htmRead through it and you will see that our borders will be removed and bring us into a global economy. this has been part of the plan starting with Clinton. It should be an issue with anyone running for office in 2006 and 2008. I learned about this when Perot was running in 1992 which meant it was under discussion during the first Bush Administration when NAFTA was first introduced.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 19, 2006 15:19:49 GMT -6
Andrew, Thanks for visiting the Economic Patriot Forum. Needless to say, I have major disagreements with what you've said. What is your alternative to a guest worker program? My "solution" is not to have a guest worker program. Having business enforce employment regulations independently? I don't know what you mean by "independently." Employers should be required to verify social security numbers, either electronically through a tamper-proof Social Security card (as proposed in H.R. 98), or by calling the Social Security Administration to verify. Banks can now verify Social Security numbers in less than 60 seconds. There's no reason why employers can't do likewise. Employers should be fined for not doing so, and imprisoned if they continue to not verify Social Security numbers. A good guest worker program is the only practical solution to our situation. I couldn't disagree more. In fact, a "guest worker" program is about the worst idea I've ever heard. It allows employers to continue to undercut the market rate for labor, by hiring these guest workers for less than the market rate. This reduces the bargaining ability and wages of American workers who must compete with them. A "guest worker" program is not just a bad idea, it's a very bad idea. I'd like to see the stats that show that illegals picking fruit have hurt middle class wages. This is nothing but a straw man argument. Illegal aliens have flooded the most rapidly growing industry since Bush took office--the construction industry. Over 40% of new jobs created under the Bush dictatorship have been in construction. There has been tremendous wage suppression in all construction trades, due exclusively to illegal immigration. Given the huge increase in demand for labor over the last 6 years in construction, wages should have increased along with demand. They have not, however, because of the even larger increase in the supply of labor. Worse still, this increase in supply is the direct result of the illegal activity of construction employers who have knowingly broken the law and hired illegal immigrants. You are not going to vote for anyone who does not support middle class interests. Well then you are just voting for a politician who is impractical because "independent enforcement" is unrealistic and hard to keep track of without a large increase in bureacracy. Once again, I don't know what you mean by "independent" enforcement here. I'm not voting for anyone who doesn't support employer sanctions for illegal hiring. If you are right, and I agree, that nothing is more attractive to a businessman than a cost efficiency, then illegal cheap labor is a means. And the shrewd businessman will take advantage of supply without mind for the middle class. This is exactly why employers need to be prosecuted. So that the "cost" to the employer of prosecution is greater than the "cost savings" from hiring illegally. Now is it practical to yell for strict sanctions. No. An efficient guest worker program is the only sound solution. In fact, it is extremely practical to impose sanctions on employers. And it is technically very easy to enforce them. They're are less of them, they're easier to find, easier to catch, and have plenty to lose from prosecution. It is far more "practical" to prosecute employers than illegal aliens, who have relatively little to lose. More importantly, prosecution of employers would have a much greater deterrent effect than prosecuting illegal immigrants. As such, the centerpiece of any plan to reduce illegal immigration should be employer sanctions. It's very simple, very practical, and very do-able.
|
|