« While 40% of Us Fantasize About Sex With a Celebrity, That Celebrity Is Almost Never Carrot Top | Main | We Think This May Be Our Fault »

08/25/2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Good observation, Tom. The White House is shamelessly trying to exploit trends that have nothing to do with its policies to try to promote its policies. However...

If you go places where illegal immigrants are few and far between, you'll find regular Americans doing the jobs Americans "just won't do." For example, once upon a time, college students worked during the summer, and some of them picked crops.

If growers paid more, they could get all their crops picked. Would that increase the cost of produce? Of course! But if we removed illegal aliens from the country, we'd be saving ourselves about $86 billion a year in taxes. How? Illegal aliens consume more in government services--welfare, free medical care, education, incarceration--than they pay in taxes.

Here in the People's Republic of Mexifornia, the average additional tax burden that illegal aliens impose on us is about $1800 per taxpayer. I think that sum would probably cover my increased grocery costs--don't you?

So, the welfare kings in dungarees at the American Farm Bureau Federation says that if we don't let them continue to violate the law by hiring cheap, illegal, rightless workers -- and foisting the social costs on American taxpayers -- catastrophe will ensue.

Give us special privileges or the world as you know it will end.

Isn't that what trial lawyers say about tort reform, the oil industry about wilderness drilling, teachers unions about education spending and timber companies about cutting down national forests?

I'm shocked.

$5 billion to $9 billion in annual production is going to rot in the field? Obviously that number is absurd on its face and, if one looks a bit closer, even Big Agriculture hasn't got the chutzpah to claim that.

What Archer Daniels and friends are actually saying is that crops that can only be economically viable in the US with the use of low wage illegal labor will no longer be grown in the US absent said illegal labor. They will be grown instead in, say, Mexico.

So, instead of sneaking into the US to get an illegal job picking crops, Pedro can stay home and pick crops legally in his country. Instead of exporting people to the US and receiving remitances, poor countries can export agricultrual products and recieve payments.

This is supposed to be a bad thing?

I'd much rather South American oranges than unskilled South Americans. And I'd happily trade $9 billion in lost agricultural production to save $85 billion in social expenditures.

Hell, we could give US agribusiness $9 billion in cash to make up their loss and still come out $76 billion ahead on the deal. And since we're already giving these fuckers $160 billion a year in farm subsidies, who'd even notice?

And that's if you believe the $9 billion figure, which I don't. Markets adapt and industry groups lie. Absent a ready supply of cheap exploitable labor, producers will mechanize and increase efficiency, which right now they have zero incentive to do.

So, the welfare kings in dungarees at the American Farm Bureau Federation says that if we don't let them continue to violate the law by hiring cheap, illegal, rightless workers -- and foisting the social costs on American taxpayers -- catastrophe will ensue.

An industry group predicting doom unless its members get special privileges.

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

$5 billion to $9 billion in annual production is going to rot in the field? Obviously that number is absurd on its face and, if one looks a bit closer, even Big Agriculture hasn't got the chutzpah to claim that.

What Archer Daniels and friends are actually saying is that crops that can only be economically viable in the US with the use of low wage illegal labor will no longer be grown in the US absent said illegal labor. They will be grown instead in, say, Mexico.

So, instead of sneaking into the US to get an illegal job picking crops, Pedro can stay home and pick crops legally in his country. Instead of exporting people to the US and receiving remitances, poor countries can export agricultrual products and recieve payments.

And this is supposed to be a bad thing?

I'd much rather import South American oranges than unskilled South Americans. And I'd happily trade $9 billion in lost agricultural production to save $85 billion in social expenditures.

Hell, we could give US agribusiness $9 billion in cash to make up their alleged loss and still come out $76 billion ahead on the deal. And since we're already giving these fuckers $160 billion a year in farm subsidies, who'd even notice?

And that's if you believe the $9 billion figure, which I don't. Absent a ready supply of cheap exploitable labor, producers will mechanize and otherwise increase efficiency, which right now they have zero incentive to do. And if they can't adapt, fuck 'em -- it's not like it's going to cost American jobs.

Funny, I don't here anything about the crops in the midwest not getting harvested on time. Guess we don't have any illegals that come here.

As for California's grape crop, one wonders how expensive their generally mediocre wine must become before they can harvest grapes economically. Perhaps our dear Steph might want to quit whining and get out into the field.

That would be "hear"

That would be "hear"

Enviromental extremists favor plague and starvation becuase their so convonced of the population bomb becuase they listen to or read all the poppycock and bull kaka by crazy wackos like PAUL EHRLICH

The comments to this entry are closed.