Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (22627)	1/3/2004 2:18:51 AM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793721

Immigration: we have the same kind of debate in Canada because we have a similar history: the country is built on immigrants. In both cases there has been an unspoken bargain and mostly everyone has kept it: Immigrants come here and work at low paying jobs - at least initially - or start businesses, and the country lets them live in a free society and educates their children so they may get ahead much further socially and economically than the parents. In a nutshell, that is the US and Canadian Dream. One hundred years ago there was the same kind rhetoric about immigrants as there is today: They displace Canadian/Us workers; they work for cut wages; they're scabs; they're a drag on social services and the schools; economic parasites who send half their paychecks out the country; etc. etc. In the last hundred years both Canada and the US have been more successful than any other countries by any measure you care to use. The reason is the immigration coupled with inclusiveness and education. More specifically, this has has led to constant capital formation, improvements, and rising price levels, which are exactly what Adam Smith described as the source of the wealth of nations. Dobbs is out to lunch. Look at his numbers: And there are 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens already living in this country, so we know there are plenty of willing employees. States spend more than $7 billion each year on K-12 education for illegal aliens and hundreds of millions more in treating illegal aliens in our hospitals in border states In 2000 the US GDP was @ 10,000 billion dollars. It can probably afford to pay the education of children of illegal immigrants (as can Canada). (In both countries the best return society has ever made on any expenditure has been the one from education). Even more sensible, would be to legalize their status so they pay taxes and contribute to the cost of their children's education. Also, rapacious employers and criminals who prey on illegals would have their wings trimmed. There was great objection when Reagan did this before but there are practical concerns: It would be exceedingly difficult to deport 8 to 12 million people. Long term, it's impossible to stop illegal immigration because economic and spiritual pressures are too great - numbers of illegal immigrants gradually increase over time. The US certainly didn't suffer economically after Reagan legalized the last lot of illegals and neither did Canada when we did it. Bush's proposal, and the others by McCain, Craig, Kennedy and Hatch, are prospectively very intelligent because of the Baby Boomers: they are about to retire and hit the Social Security system. Every one of those illegals' children better be well educated earners if we are to support the retirees. Yes, yes. I know Kumar objects to the Ponzi scheme but it's here in both countries and it's going to take quite a while to work our way out of it and maintaining a youngish work force is essential and it can only be done through immigration. Personal opinion: any person who has the initiative and drive to get himself or herself out from behind a bullock or out of a crib and somehow get to N America probably has the stuff to make an effective citizen.