What would Martin Niemoller think about Arizona?

[Griff]

Originally Posted by jinx

Is it possibly, in your mind, for someone to want immigration law enforced and not be a racist?

Yes.

Is is possible to believe that illegal immigration is a problem, moreso for some areas than others, and that legislating law enforcement tools to deal with it is an attempt at reducing the problem, and not simple pandering?

Yes, it is a regional problem, but this legislation looks to be mostly pandering. It is like the banking thing, the Democrats are not addressing the core problem by breaking up the too big to fail banks, but they are attempting to solve some of the problems.

They already are, and not just in AZ.

...which brings us back to the drug war and the Mexican economy, the real problems.

[skysidhe]

As far as Arizona and Texas along with other boarder states it is a regional problem because of the drug wars. In my state the Hispanic population is 10%. When I was young these were mainly migrant farm workers but now there is established neighborhoods. People are hardworking and this area is pretty liberal but the lenient welcoming attitude would change if the drug cartels keep pushing their way in further into the country.
Desperate times call for desperate measures. Why should we be different than any other country when protecting itself? Why does this have to be a race issue? Where are the rights of the people to live without fear?

[Cloud]

immigration is not a problem because of the drug wars. Immigration has always been a problem; even legal immigration has been a contentious issue in our history. Problems with illegal aliens have existed since the borders were established. The current crisis is exacerbated by the drug wars, but the problem has existed and will exist, "drug wars" or not.

[Griff]

My problem with it is that no matter what is done at the border, human intelligence will circumvent those "secure the border" measures if there is a strong economic or social incentive. As long as we foster a black market, we will have people isolated from the wider society who will clan up and remain outside the law. Does the law in Arizona make us more or less free? Does it make us more or less safe? I think it makes us less free and less safe to abandon an open culture.

[jinx]

...which brings us back to the drug war and the Mexican economy, the real problems.

I was actually thinking of all the other reasons that make traffic stops a scary situation...
But if the real problem is the mexican economy, what legislation do the republicans need to pass to solve or at least address it? Instead of pandering I mean.

My problem with it is that no matter what is done at the border, human intelligence will circumvent those "secure the border" measures if there is a strong economic or social incentive.

Especially if there is no way to detect illegals and no consequences for being one.

I think it makes us less free and less safe to abandon an open culture.

What? How?

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Griff

I think it makes us less free and less safe to abandon an open culture.

I respect your point but I see it as a philosophical one; one that we as a country already adhere to. Immigration reform with the express purpose of tamping down criminal activity does not, in my opinion, take precedence over our basic principles as a country.

@ cloud. I agree with you.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Griff

I think it makes us less free and less safe to abandon an open culture.

Originally Posted by jinx

What? How?

We have a flexible dynamic economy, which takes advantage of a free flow of ideas and people. If we shut down immigration we stifle that dynamism. We know we have a screwed up education system in this country, which often trains kids for jobs that don't exist. If Mexico, India, or Canada is accidentally educating people who fill positions our kids don't, we need to take advantage of that to remain a flexible economy. I see immigration controls as largely fear drive. That fear is reasonable when related to the violent drug culture, but not reasonable if it thinks we can't absorb productive immigrants.

As far as what Republicans (but lets say everyone) need to do,.. On our side of the fence we shrink the market for illegal drugs. On the other side of the fence we use our considerable economic/political influence to support rule of law and market reforms in Mexico.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Griff

If we shut down immigration we stifle that dynamism.

Who said anything about shutting down immigration? Securing our borders doesn't mean closing them.

[Griff]

Securing our borders is a kind of magical empty phrase, so I assign it this meaning: militarizing the border, bureaucratizing travel in and out of the country, reducing flexibility, and creating barriers of intimidation, fear, and frustration. Productive immigrants often seek to escape that which we propose to inflict upon ourselves.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by Griff

We have a flexible dynamic economy, which takes advantage of a free flow of ideas and people. If we shut down immigration we stifle that dynamism.

The AZ law doesn't even try to shut down immigration. It just makes what's already illegal under federal law illegal under state law.

We know we have a screwed up education system in this country, which often trains kids for jobs that don't exist. If Mexico, India, or Canada is accidentally educating people who fill positions our kids don't, we need to take advantage of that to remain a flexible economy.

I agree on principal, that's why we DO allow immigration. But first and foremost, these jobs need to be filled by legal residents.

I see immigration controls as largely fear drive. That fear is reasonable when related to the violent drug culture, but not reasonable if it thinks we can't absorb productive immigrants.

Agreed. Productive legal immigrants that pay income tax anyway... Btw, how's the economy over there in CA these days?

As far as what Republicans (but lets say everyone) need to do,.. On our side of the fence we shrink the market for illegal drugs.

Pfizer is trying...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Griff

Securing our borders is a kind of magical empty phrase, so I assign it this meaning: militarizing the border, bureaucratizing travel in and out of the country, reducing flexibility, and creating barriers of intimidation, fear, and frustration. Productive immigrants often seek to escape that which we propose to inflict upon ourselves.

But your assigned meaning is so extreme, I doubt if you could find more than a handful of people to endorse implementing it.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Griff

...which brings us back to the drug war and the Mexican economy, the real problems.

I agree with Griff here. We don't actually have an immigration problem. Rejiggering our immigration rules and their enforcement will not answer to the trouble we're having.

The problem is in Mexico and I think it can only be solved there: Mexico does not have a middle class visible to the naked eye. To achieve a bootstrapping up from dismal poverty to the lower middle class, the Méxicanos have to travel al Norte. Some carry this all the way to Canada's cities and towns.

Which is likely to improve the quality of Mexican restaurants throughout the continent.

The historical source of Mexico's lack of a middle class and its opportunities is easy enough to see: unlike the US and Canada, Mexican Spanish immigration -- and it was at first exclusively so -- was not a flood of smallholders, each with his stake in the enterprise. It was a sparse settlement of primarily the aristocratic landowning class and their retainers, recreating the only economy they knew: the latifundian economy of Spanish landowners and Spanish peasants. Thus they created it and thus it remained. All over the place and for centuries.

So, the 1960s joke had it that Latin America resembles an LP record -- 33 1/3 revolutions per minute. The twentieth century was when it all came to a head, building on some brawling begun in the nineteenth. Every bit of it over resources, at bottom.

So, short of revolution and raping real estate away from people who used to have it, and rationing it out to people who used not to have it, what? Well, an organic, viral answer was to export labor. Population too. Guess who's importing.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by jinx

Agreed. Productive legal immigrants that pay income tax anyway... Btw, how's the economy over there in CA these days?

Eleven percent unemployment statewide.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Yeah, we've been Mexico's safety valve, giving the peasants one more option before boiling over and actually fixing their country.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

Do you ever give politicians credit for acting altruistically? Or in this case, legal experts with nothing to gain.

I certainly have never seen it.

So your point is moot.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Yeah, we've been Mexico's safety valve, giving the peasants one more option before boiling over and actually fixing their country.