Illegal Immigration- what to do?

POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Friday, May 12, 2023 14:24
VIEWED: 9966
PAGE 7 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

SIGNYM

Thursday, July 20, 2006 12:48 AM

There is the European paradigm and the "cheap labor" paradigm. I read an article recently in the LA Times about how Germany "needs" to change its ways and squeeze more out of its workers. The funny thing is, the article said in the very beginning that Germany is not only the largest economy in Europe it's also the fastest growing. So why would the writer push for a solution to a "problem" that doesn't even exist?

Effing stupid capitalist suck-ups! Apparently they can't connect the dots ... heck, they can't even see the dots... even when they personally write them down because it crosses some deep ideological barrier.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

SOUPCATCHER

Thursday, July 20, 2006 2:01 AM

Rue,

I don't know where the endpoint of that system would be. Not sure I want to find out. You also have to add in forced obsolescence and that companies purposefully design their products to wear out quicker than they used to.

SignyM,

When we started doing joint projects with German colleagues it was amazing to me how much vacation time they got. Color me green with envy.

RUE

Thursday, July 20, 2006 2:19 AM

Hi Soupcatcher,

Thanks for the reply.

I just want to ramble a bit - I hate, hate - shopping. I find cruising the malls depressing. There are stores and stores and stores of crap. How many shoes can you buy? How many phones? Plastic dishes? Trinkets?

And yet the US economy is based on regularly unloading crap out of the stores (mostly around x-mas - remember patriotic shopping the x-mas season after 911 ? - but at other times of the year, too).

Consumer spending is, roughly 80% of the US economy. But as empty as it seems, there is a substantial segment of the population whose main motivation in life is to repeatedly throw out old crap and buy new crap. The one who dies with the most toys wins ... and all that.

I sometimes wonder what would happen to the economy if people just stopped reflexive shopping.

SOUPCATCHER

Thursday, July 20, 2006 2:48 AM

Rue,

I'm right there with you on the hating shopping. I don't browse in stores. Going to the mall feels so high school. If I'm planning on buying something, I'll research on the internet until I find the exact model I want and a store that carries it and then I'll go buy it. The only shopping I do on a regular basis is at the supermarket and even that is pretty targetted.

And, from watching television, I'm apparently not in the target demographic. Pretty much nothing I see advertised appeals to me.

So if they're depending on people like us to keep the economy going, good luck.

KANEMAN

Thursday, July 20, 2006 7:24 AM

Earlier posts...We should all be proud that we come from "imigrants"...The key word is Legal...say it all together now "LEGAL"...As Savage says....A nation without a common language, a national culture,and a soverin boarder will fail. Pick up a history book...be one be all ...let's not be France.

SIGNYM

Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:45 PM

Let's assume that we throw open our borders to immigrants so that our LEGAL immigrant population is high. I still wonder how much diversity a nation can tolerate and still maintain a functional identity. 10%? 20%?

I know that a very small group- less than 5%- who behave in a criminal manner can swing an entire society's spending. A slightly larger group of people- 15%- can maintain an organized insurgency by simply sheltering insurgents. A larger group of people- 20%-can be a huge pain in the *ss by simply refusing to assimilate. Quebec, for example, is about 20% of Canads's population (7.5 million out of 33 million).

My guess is that if people are eager to assimilate and there is no barrier (ie prejudice) to their eventual inclusion, the number might be something like 10%. At that point, services like language classes become choked.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

RUE

Thursday, July 20, 2006 3:42 PM

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/355/3/229?query=TOC

Language Barriers to Health Care in the United States

Some 22.3 million (8.4 percent) have limited English proficiency, speaking English less than "very well".

Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans ... with limited English proficiency grew by 7.3 million (a 53 percent increase). The numbers are particularly high in some places: in 2000, 20 percent of Californians and 47 percent of Miami residents had limited English proficiency

SOUPCATCHER

Thursday, July 20, 2006 9:06 PM

Rue,

Thanks for the highly informative link. It raises an important point about language proficiency: that there are situations when the inability to communicate can have life or death implications.

More to come, but I wanted to let you know that the article has sparked some revised thinking on my part.

RUE

Thursday, July 20, 2006 11:18 PM

Hi Soupcatcher,

I'm glad you found the article useful.

The whole topic sparked some thinking on my part as well.

My mother's parents were immigrants and spoke Polish exclusively in the home. I mentioned my mother's first language was Polish, and that she was taught English in school (by bilingual nuns). The family lived in a small but functional Polish community. The nuns all spoke fluent Polish and some English, as did the priest, the doctor, the baker, store keepers, factory owner, neighbors etc.

So my grandparents were lucky enough to live in a highly functional Polish-speaking community. They spoke basic English. And on the off chance they needed to go beyond basic English (for medical care, complicated financial transactions etc) they had loving, responsible, helpful children who were well spoken in both languages who lived nearby.

The neighborhood was less than a mile from where my parents bought a home, and our family went to the same church my mother went to when she was growing up. We children also went to the same parochial school my mother went to. I spent a lot of time with my grandparents in that neighborhood.

For me that was normal, comfortable and happy. It seemed to work pretty well. So I hope you can see I don't start out with the idea that all "those" foreign people should learn English - or else.

But the old paradigm doesn't seem to work now, not even in that neighborhood where it used to work so well. I think the difference is that direct contact with the larger world is vital, whereas before it wasn't as important. And for its part, the larger world has more need to communicate well with the various immigrant communities.

It pains me to think of those unique immigrant communities homogenized, sterilized and standardized into bland uniformity. But speaking English is now a necessity for immigrants and for the country.

Sincerely,
Rue

SIGNYM

Thursday, July 20, 2006 11:32 PM

I've actually come at the question of immigration from several different angles over the course of my life. One of them is from the perspective of the "desti-nation". The other is from the perspective of the immigrant.

Let's assume that the destination wants to do everything reasonable for new arrivals. (That's assuming compassion the USA doesn't show even for its citizens, but this is is a thought experiment... not bounded by reality.)

That would mean not only a background check but a physical to make sure they aren't bringing in communicable diseases, intensive language instruction, driving instructions, and significant education on the laws of the land... rights as workers, consumers, individuals, borrowers. Classes about the banking system. Personal counseling for people who may been persecuted, tortured or otherwise victimized Some level of followup to make sure people aren't disadvantaged in their everyday dealings in modern American society.

I realize that many things are a function of money, btu I don't see us doing ANY of this.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE