Skip to main content

Response to “more immigration stuff to fight about”

Should we be debating about immigration in light of free movement of labor? As I posted in my previous post, someone asked the question,
"So, what would a economic conservative view of immigration really be? Would labor move as freely as capital across international borders? Would there be less regulation on who could migrate as long as it lowered the price of labor?"
If it was that simple (free market labor), we would have found a solution long time ago. The issue is not the free movement of labor. The issue is the lives, dreams, and hopes of millions of human beings trying to make a better life for themselves.

To be clear, hope, dreams, and aspirations in no way justifies breaking the law. This in no way excuses illegal immigration, nor should it remove someone from the potential consequences of illegal immigration. But, the debate needs to be shaped in terms of human lives, no movement of labor. We are talking about People people!

Otherwise, the debate gets shaped in a way that would favor the businesses that have perhaps most benefited from being able to pay below standard wages to illegal immigrants. I'm against minimum wage caps, and subsidizing labor, but I'm also against the unjust reduction of fair wages in the course of normal free market enterprise as a result of illegal activities.

That's not capitalism, its not conservatism, and its not right.

What am I saying? I'm saying I don't agree with those who would argue in favor of a all-out amnesty for illegal immigrants on the basis of economic need. That may well be part of the reasons, but it's not just about economics.

If I heard our politicians calling America to be merciful, and to show compassion,...well, at least there is an honest argument to be had there (though I don't believe in "compassionate government"...there is no such thing). The debate on immigration cannot and should not be dictated strictly by the business lobby or on economic needs. We have to consider the social and human impact--the consequences of illegal immigration, not just on our country but on the immigrants themselves, as well as to our communities.

Here is what I think: illegal immigration hurts illegal immigrants. Illegal immigration hurts immigrants. Illegal immigration hurts marriages, children, and communities. Its that simple folks.


Popular posts from this blog

Communism: Good Money for the "El Viejo"

I guess Fidel Castro is doing ok. Forbes lists Castro as one of the richest in the world, right up there with the Queen of England. I bet he didn't like the attention. It was hard to figure it out, but it seems they managed to throw some numbers together.
In the past, we have relied on a percentage of Cuba's gross domestic product to estimate Fidel Castro's fortune. This year we have used more traditional valuation methods, comparing state-owned assets Castro is assumed to control with comparable publicly traded companies. A reasonable discount was then applied to compensate for the obvious disclosure issues.

Hispanic Trending: Leave your name at the border

Most people miss the fact that Hispanics do not consist of a single ethnic group. Besides that, the heritage that each one of the many nationalities represented in our immigrant population is diverse in itself. As I read Manuel Muñoz's post on his assimilation experience, I can tell you mine was nothing like his. But I can relate to this paragraph. My niece's name is Katie Belle (Sierra). It's intriguing to watch "American" names begin to dominate among my nieces and nephews and second cousins, as well as with the children of my hometown friends. I am not surprised to meet 5-year-old Brandon or Kaitlyn. Hardly anyone questions the incongruity of matching these names with last names like Trujillo or Zepeda. The English-only way of life partly explains the quiet erasure of cultural difference that assimilation has attempted to accomplish. A name like Kaitlyn Zepeda doesn't completely obscure her ethnicity, but the half-step of her nam…

Podcast: Talking GOP Debate and No Child Left Behind

Click here to listen to the MP3 audio of the discussion between Michel Martin, Stephen Henderson and myself on the GOP debate, and Bush's push for No Child Left Behind. The segment on the new gospel music competition reality show is a great segment -- check it out as well. Tell Me More, October 12, 2007 · This week, GOP presidential contenders met for a debate in Dearborn, Michigan. Meanwhile, President Bush was stumping for reauthorization of the education bill, "No Child Left Behind." In this week's Political Chat, hear insights from political blogger Josue Sierra and Stephen Henderson, Deputy Editorial Page Editor at the Detroit Free Press.

You can listen on the NPR website right here.

Related Posts:
- On Air: Talking GOP Debate and No Child Left Behind
- GOP Economy Debate

Other Posts of Interest:
- Conference for Minority Journalists of Faith Cross posted at: