What If Mexico Was “White”?

[no name 1]

30,000 illegal Irish in Boston and 100,000 in New York.

Out of what, 12 million nationally?

---

In March of 2006 the Pew Hispanic Center estimated the undocumented population ranged from 11.5 to 12 million individuals, a number supported by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO). Pew estimated that 57% of this population comes from Mexico and about half of them are illegal; 25% from Central America and, to a much lesser extent, South America (which has no road access to the US); 9% from Asia; 6% from Europe, and the remaining 4% from elsewhere.

http://pewresearch.org/

Somewhere around 45 percent of those here illegally are from overstayed visas....that fact seems to get overlooked in these debates. That's no small change.

Read the bold part above again.

---

Visa overstays are a second significant form of violation. A "visa overstayer" is someone who remains in the United States after the temporary authorization afforded by a visa expires. Visa overstayers tend to be somewhat more educated and better off financially than those who crossed the border illegally.[10]

To help track visa overstayers the US-VISIT (United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) program collects and retains biographic, travel, and biometric information, such as photographs and fingerprints, of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. It also requires electronic readable passports containing this information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immig...e_United_States

So are you implying that this is more of a class thing?

Ironically, if we only allow well educated immigrants into this country, guess who will have to fill the low paying jobs? Citizens.

But we benefit more for accepting all types of immigrants, rather than giving preference to one specific class or group. As it is, getting an immigrant visa to the US, without family ties, or good education, is next to impossible.

No. I was pointing out that visa overstayers tended to be more educated. You know, taking jobs from USCs - now in blue collar AND white collar. And before you say people won't hire them, many places simply do not check backgrounds.

if people were really angry about it, if they really cared about the principle of the matter, then they'd stop buying anything and everything tainted by illegal employment. but they don't. and probably never ever will.

Until I own my own farm/raise chickens/grow veg (& can make my own vodka), etc that is impossible.

Edited November 14, 2007 by devilette

[Alex+R 0]

I think he's right. IMO it's not so outrageous to imagine that society is organised according to the ideology of its most dominant and influential groups.

I think most people find it difficult to see race as something other than biological. So the idea of racism, or being a racist, seems ludicrous. It's a huge roadblock to talking about racism and I think it's part of what's dumbing down the discussion. (I think.) (I hope.)

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

We're not overrun. The U.S. is not facing overpopulation. The issue isn't even one of numbers, at least not yet, or stemming the tide.

so how is the water situation out there in the desert? if it's not a topic of numbers, do tell why so many areas have in place water restrictions. atlanta, anyone?

Oddly, it's less of an issue here than in other parts of the country, because water management is a big deal for obvious reasons. That said, it is an unnatural place to live, I'll be the first to admit. A city this size shouldn't exist in the desert. (The husband and I are planning a move to Portland, Oregon, within the year, I feel I should add.) :-)

Should we connect population growth to drought conditions? I don't mean that sarcastically; I don't know.

i think it would be foolish to not take water supplies into account with population.

[Fandango 1,440]

I think he's right. IMO it's not so outrageous to imagine that society is organised according to the ideology of its most dominant and influential groups.

I think most people find it difficult to see race as something other than biological. So the idea of racism, or being a racist, seems ludicrous. It's a huge roadblock to talking about racism and I think it's part of what's dumbing down the discussion. (I think.) (I hope.)

Race IS biological. If you're talking classim, that's another story....but to say racism is something other than biological has got to be one of the most ludicrous things I have ever heard in my life.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We're not overrun. The U.S. is not facing overpopulation. The issue isn't even one of numbers, at least not yet, or stemming the tide.

so how is the water situation out there in the desert? if it's not a topic of numbers, do tell why so many areas have in place water restrictions. atlanta, anyone?

Oddly, it's less of an issue here than in other parts of the country, because water management is a big deal for obvious reasons. That said, it is an unnatural place to live, I'll be the first to admit. A city this size shouldn't exist in the desert. (The husband and I are planning a move to Portland, Oregon, within the year, I feel I should add.) :-)

Should we connect population growth to drought conditions? I don't mean that sarcastically; I don't know.

i think it would be foolish to not take water supplies into account with population.

How is Arizona (or any other state for that matter) suppose to take into account population other than limiting development? Nobody is interested in putting restriction on development. Phoenix metropolitan area is one big urban sprawl, much like LA. Poorly designed and completely at the mercy of development.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Is it really that absurd to illustrate the population and limited resources? Or are you going to go shake your magic tree outside that's going to supply everything for everyone.... It's not simply about natural resources that I'm talking about...it's jobs, health care, education, etc. Where is it all going to come from? have you heard about the social security problems? To say that math has nothing to do with it is quite frankly, shocking. I'm not saying 'close the borders completely!' That would be absurd. But to compare it to when this country was officially 'founded' as if all other outside influences are the same is just even more absurd to me.

Take this debate out of sweeping generalizations like 'I'm going to speak for all Americans when I say that Americans are racist against non-whites' and maybe we'll get somewhere. Otherwise, you're just waxing lyrical.

The idea is that with more people, there are more workers--more people needing health care and education, and more people to provide it. It's not as if I'm suggesting that we let anyone and everyone in to suck on the public teat without contributing anything. And the social security problems in fact have to do with a current shortage of workers right now who will be supporting the baby boomers very soon. And a few other things, but that's the main one.

And I did mention changing our resource use. We clearly can't have double the population and the same wasteful use of resources, from water to oil.

And I never said I was speaking for all Americans. I just wonder what world some people are living in who don't appear to notice or at least acknowledge rampant discrimination and--I'll say it--racism that exist in this country. It does indeed influence how people feel about whom they want to share their society with.

[bakofoil 27]

"Boston has wholeheartedly embraced these new Irish, despite their illegal status, largely because so many people of Irish descent live here and have fond feelings for their ancestral home. Many in the local Irish-American community would like to see Federal law changed to permit more Irish to immigrate legally to the United States. Meantime, the illegal immigrants are viewed charitably, as hard-working newcomers who need a helping hand." quote

In the raging debate over immigration, Mexico and Mexicans are continually disparaged. Far too many Americans look unfavorably towards their neighbors south of the border. The antipathy dates back to the 1846-48 Mexican/American War and the 1845 American annexation of the Mexican province of Texas. Mexico lost Texas and around 50% of its territory including California, Nevada and Utah, and sizable parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming due to the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Nearly 8,000 Mexican families were living in the territories of California and New Mexico. Most remained there.

Two starkly different reports yet what is the true difference between the historical European immigrants and Mexican immigrants? There is no question in my mind that the majority of people who entered the US at any stage in its cultural development were hard-working newcomers who needed a helping hand. The Mexicans at least had some historical claim to the states bordering present-day Mexico.

For all the government bangs on about the problem of illegal immigration it still does nothing about the companies exploiting the situation by paying low-wages. Why should they do anything? As soon as people become legal then life becomes too expensive to take those low-paying jobs. Illegal immigration enables these companies to produce cheaply and this, in turn, benefits the government. Don't blame people for being illegal, blame the ones who make it a viable option.

[Alex+R 0]

RE: the BOSTON & IRISH thing.

Maybe a better comparison would be Irish vs. Brazilian immigrants in Boston. There are roughly the same number of illegal Brazilians living in and around Boston as illegal Irish. The Brazilians say they face a lot of prejudice there, and that some Brazilians who are legally in the country say they are Portuguese to escape prejudice there. Same Boston population, same number of illegal immigrants in each group, VERY different attitude toward Irish and Brazilian. What caused that?

eta: they would all pretty much be visa-overstayers.

Edited November 14, 2007 by Alex+R

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

We're not overrun. The U.S. is not facing overpopulation. The issue isn't even one of numbers, at least not yet, or stemming the tide.

so how is the water situation out there in the desert? if it's not a topic of numbers, do tell why so many areas have in place water restrictions. atlanta, anyone?

Oddly, it's less of an issue here than in other parts of the country, because water management is a big deal for obvious reasons. That said, it is an unnatural place to live, I'll be the first to admit. A city this size shouldn't exist in the desert. (The husband and I are planning a move to Portland, Oregon, within the year, I feel I should add.) :-)

Should we connect population growth to drought conditions? I don't mean that sarcastically; I don't know.

i think it would be foolish to not take water supplies into account with population.

How is Arizona (or any other state for that matter) suppose to take into account population other than limiting development? Nobody is interested in putting restriction on development. Phoenix metropolitan area is one big urban sprawl, much like LA. Poorly designed and completely at the mercy of development.

they will soon realize their folly in several more decades as water supplies become tighter.

[no name 1]

all the government bangs on about the problem of illegal immigration it still does nothing about the companies exploiting the situation by paying low-wages. Why should they do anything? As soon as people become legal then life becomes too expensive to take those low-paying jobs. Illegal immigration enables these companies to produce cheaply and this, in turn, benefits the government. Don't blame people for being illegal, blame the ones who make it a viable option.

and round & round we go....

They broke the law first by staying here illegally. That is their fault, not the US govt.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i think some posters are taking the racism aspect way too personally. gary, lisad, etc. we know you are not racist people. but the fact that you're not racist doesn't mean that there are not huge numbers of people who are racist, and that racism doesn't play a huge part in how many people feel about this issue. like the people who will rant all day about brown skinned people who pick the vegetables they buy at the grocery store, but for some reason won't use the same vitriol for the predominantly white businesses, companies etc. who hire them in the first place. those guys get to make more money by hiring illegals who will work for less and always keep their mouths shut, but none of that profit or savings on overhead gets passed on to you as a consumer. i don't buy it. illegal immigration would not be what it is if there weren't people here gladly giving them work. if people were really angry about it, if they really cared about the principle of the matter, then they'd stop buying anything and everything tainted by illegal employment. but they don't. and probably never ever will.

It insults my pov to sum it up as based in racism.

Should I sit here and say 'oh right, I know you're not talking about me and gary but yeah, most anti-illegals hate brown people' #######? How really does anyone know who hates whom? Why is it always a circular, emotional argument which has to attempt to pull apart the other's pov?

This reminds me of an SAT question

If racists hate immigrants, then which of the following is true?

A. All anti-illegals are racist.

B. All racists are racist.

But you're right. Stopping illegal immigration can be done if people put their money where their mouths are.

I certainly wouldn’t say that “most anti-illegals” feel that way – but I do think it’s a little tenuous to deny that it exists at all. If we can recognize that this is a real issue in need of a real, comprehensive and long-term solution, why is it that hard to imagine that together with these legitimate arguments there also exists a very ugly undercurrent of emotional reactionism? It shouldn’t be a bandwagon issue – as I say there are legitimate questions that need to be addressed, but at the same time I don’t want to take ownership of the opinions of other people that are less than desirable and to some extent undermine my position.

To be clear – its not that the same people with the legitimate arguments are indulging in this or perpetuating this sort of negativity (for the record – I don’t support illegal immigration), but I do think its unrealistic to imagine that it doesn’t exist at all, or that it too is a problem that needs to be dealt with, and at the least condemned.

[Dan J 277]

I think fear plays into most peoples opposition of illegal immigration, but not necessarily fear of race or culture.

Some fear overpopulation, they don't want to loose they space and resources that they have access to. But compared to the rest of the world, we have much more space and use many more resources per person than any other country.

Others fear competition in their jobs. Though from a economic perspective, competition usually makes people work more efficiently.

Some fear the impact that a large number of low income immigrants will have on government services and taxes (Although its much smaller than other expenses like uninsured citizens on health care and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan).

Some fear the stereotype that illegal immigrants will bring more crime to their cities and neighborhood.

[Alex+R 0]

I certainly wouldn’t say that “most anti-illegals†feel that way – but I do think it’s a little tenuous to deny that it exists at all. If we can recognize that this is a real issue in need of a real, comprehensive and long-term solution, why is it that hard to imagine that together with these legitimate arguments there also exists a very ugly undercurrent of emotional reactionism? It shouldn’t be a bandwagon issue – as I say there are legitimate questions that need to be addressed, but at the same time I don’t want to take ownership of the opinions of other people that are less than desirable and to some extent undermine my position.

To be clear – its not that the same people with the legitimate arguments are indulging in this or perpetuating this sort of negativity (for the record – I don’t support illegal immigration), but I do think its unrealistic to imagine that it doesn’t exist at all, or that it too is a problem that needs to be dealt with, and at the least condemned.

Yes. I have many concerns about the current state of our borders and immigration system, and by no means do I think the status quo is ok. Yet, I really hesitate to throw my hat in with a group associated with bigotry and closed-mindedness.

Edited November 14, 2007 by Alex+R

[bakofoil 27]

all the government bangs on about the problem of illegal immigration it still does nothing about the companies exploiting the situation by paying low-wages. Why should they do anything? As soon as people become legal then life becomes too expensive to take those low-paying jobs. Illegal immigration enables these companies to produce cheaply and this, in turn, benefits the government. Don't blame people for being illegal, blame the ones who make it a viable option.

and round & round we go....

They broke the law first by staying here illegally. That is their fault, not the US govt.

It is a circular argument and it's not one just confined to the US. Whose fault is it that UK immigration employed a number of illegal immigrants to secure our borders? I'm merely trying to point out that there is an economic argument here.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Man, these opinion threads are exhausting! I think I'll start a new thread about my injured toenail adventure.