NationStates Jolt Archive

You know, one of the shows I usually listen to when I'm driving in the afternoon is the Jeff Katz show. He is a Jewish conservative who moved to Charlotte, NC from I think L.A. or San. Fran., somewhere in California. Well anyways, back when we had the illegal immigration bill going through Congress, he would fill his radio show about how the bill wasn't a good bill and how the immigrants are invading our country etc. etc. You know, basic xenophobic crap. However, he does make a good point about America's illegal immigration problem. Because these immigrants are not documented, and because they do not have a valid SS #, or a green card or anything that would put them into the system, their employers can pay them pretty much anything they want. Why, because what is the immigrant going to do, go to the Better Business Beau? If they did that, then the BBB would contact the INS and they would get kicked out of the country. The employers also hang the threat of calling the INS over their heads as well if they get out of line. So basically the illegals here will just have to be happy with whatever the employers decide to throw their way. Mr. Katz calls the illegal immigrant the new serf class because of the conditions that exist for them at their job, and I actually think he's right. It does suck for them to be in that position, and they are in that position. It's just a system where they will be the new serf class while everyone else enjoys the fruit of their labors.

Well, i was just reading up on this a little bit today, and discussing it with a friend who has potentially a confrontation with an employer about who he supervises at his work.
Inspired, of course, by this ...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/08/11/MN9PRGIMM.DTL
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/10/AR2007081001113.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Reminds of the only Holocaust surviver in Congress blocking the vote to recognize the Armenian genocide as fact.

that is one of the biggest problems of unoffical immigration. there are 12 million people in this country with inadequate legal protection. this is as true for violent crimes as it is for breaking wage and safety standards.

it doesnt make them serfs but it does put every illegal worker at the mercy of his employer.

I had to cut some of my illegal immigrants fingers off last night because they were a week behind schedule building my fortress! What if the duke were to attack my land tomorow night, how could my vassals and I defend them properly without a bastion from wich we could muster and fight back? When will they ever learn...

This is just one reason we need to make legal immigration a better process.

And it's a reason the anti-immigrant crowd goes on about how lazy illegal immigrants are, that they just didn't "feel like" going through the process legally, and that they are getting a "free ride" and "taking our jobs."

Honestly, WTF can believe that shyte? Honestly believe that illegal immigrants just WANT to be illegal? That they get anything positive out of it at all?

And if anyone here does have a job being ass-raped by some fruit-picking contractor who can treat you like a slave because you have zero legal or economic recourse to anything he does, maybe you're better off having that job "taken."

Not entirely concerned. I do think that immigration processes should be made better, but, I don't consider the plight of illegal immigrants to be the overriding factor. Let's just look at it this way, the power that the employer has here is only to push the benefits extracted by the illegal workers down to the level of that worker's other opportunities, that is significant power, but it cannot be called a matter of serfdom or exploitation as it is still a good deal for them.

Let's just look at it this way, the power that the employer has here is only to push the benefits extracted by the illegal workers down to the level of that worker's other opportunities,

WTF? You have any idea what you're talking about? The employer can make them work overtime, refuse to pay them, cheat them, fire them at will for any reason, heap verbal and physical abuse on them, etc. etc.

that is significant power, but it cannot be called a matter of serfdom or exploitation as it is still a good deal for them.

Of COURSE it's exploitation. And saying it is a "good deal for them" is fucking offensive. It's like saying being a slave isn't all that bad cuz you get to work with your family. Ugh.

WTF? You have any idea what you're talking about? The employer can make them work overtime, refuse to pay them, cheat them, fire them at will for any reason, heap verbal and physical abuse on them, etc. etc. Yes, the employer can. If they don't like it, then they can go back to Mexico and try to take a job there. They don't do that though, the abusive employer is still better than the opportunities in their home country apparently, and more of them come over to get that abuse. This means that for all of the evils that occur with this new employer, he is still a better deal.


Of COURSE it's exploitation. And saying it is a "good deal for them" is fucking offensive. It's like saying being a slave isn't all that bad cuz you get to work with your family. Ugh.
Offensive? I think that some people are too easily offended. This is a different matter than slavery, slaves have less options and the employer gets power from making non-slave options more undesirable. In this case, all we have is that the employer is extracting additional benefit from the deal in order to push it to the level where benefits from this job are equivalent to benefits from other options. They aren't even supposed to be here in the first place according to our laws, however, they still apparently benefit from coming. Instead of calling my comment offensive though and trying to shame me into giving up, why not work through the framework and identify bad premises?

No; serfs weren't criminals.

No; serfs weren't criminals.

I could argue with that. Serfs, although living on their lord's land, would probably be more likely to steal if they were unhappy with their working conditions.

I could argue with that. Serfs, although living on their lord's land, would probably be more likely to steal if they were unhappy with their working conditions.

Every illegal immigrant is a criminal; the same does not apply to serfs. Say that I stated that bank robbers were criminals, as opposed to stay-at-home moms. Would you say that my statement is false because some stay-at-home moms have broken the law?

If the United States annexed Mexico, the illegal immigrant problem would by and large be dealt with. I doubt anyone really wants to bar these unfortunates seeking a better life, but annexation smacks of Imperialism, which is somehow a Bad Thing. Quite frankly, as soon as the Mexican government started issuing pamphlets instructing it's people on HOW to illegally enter the US, it as much as admitted it couldn't deal with it's nation's condition and fobbed the problem off on it's northern neighbor.
Annexation would aid both countries-Mexico would be greatly improved by the influx of US money and development, and the US would gain a horridly impoverished region it's liberals could hand-wring over, keeping them out of the affairs of the rest of the country. Seems win-win to me.

I never argued that illegal immigrants weren't criminals.

And besides, I didn't say that all serfs were criminals, just that is was fairly likely for a serf to be a criminal. Feudal ages were crap for them.

Yes, the employer can. If they don't like it, then they can go back to Mexico and try to take a job there. They don't do that though, the abusive employer is still better than the opportunities in their home country apparently, and more of them come over to get that abuse. This means that for all of the evils that occur with this new employer, he is still a better deal.

How much of a choice is that? An "opportunity?" Yeah, stay and be abused, go back and get more abused. Wonderful.

You know, giving in to a rapist rather than fight and be killed might be a better deal. I suppose you're only "not entirely concerned" about that too?

Offensive? I think that some people are too easily offended.

I think some people are too easily offensive.

This is a different matter than slavery, slaves have less options and the employer gets power from making non-slave options more undesirable.

Oh, but they still have options! They have opportunities! Clearly, slaves *like* being slaves because slavery is a better deal!

In this case, all we have is that the employer is extracting additional benefit from the deal

I don't think you've ever even talked with, let alone understood, migrant workers and how much they get abused, for what "benefits" and by whom. If you did, you would know that is not "all we have" here.

They aren't even supposed to be here in the first place according to our laws, however, they still apparently benefit from coming. Instead of calling my comment offensive though and trying to shame me into giving up, why not work through the framework and identify bad premises?

I'm not trying to "shame" you. I don't think you'll have shame. I am simply stating how much you are being offensive. As for bad premises, the euphemisms you are using "additional benefits" and "better opportunity" conceal your underlying belief that this is not even a problem. (You are "not entirely concerned" after all). It's a problem.

If the United States annexed Mexico, the illegal immigrant problem would by and large be dealt with. I doubt anyone really wants to bar these unfortunates seeking a better life, but annexation smacks of Imperialism, which is somehow a Bad Thing. Quite frankly, as soon as the Mexican government started issuing pamphlets instructing it's people on HOW to illegally enter the US, it as much as admitted it couldn't deal with it's nation's condition and fobbed the problem off on it's northern neighbor.
Annexation would aid both countries-Mexico would be greatly improved by the influx of US money and development, and the US would gain a horridly impoverished region it's liberals could hand-wring over, keeping them out of the affairs of the rest of the country. Seems win-win to me.

Except if you're Mexican and enjoy being part of a sovereign nation. And what makes you think anyone in the US government even considers annexing Mexico? it would cost FAR MORE to straighten out their problems than anyone wants to deal with. We've got enough homelessness and joblessness that we're not dealing with adequately in our own nation without deciding to take on someone else's problems.

Good, I hope they are paid shit for invading our country. Actually, less than shit.

How much of a choice is that? An "opportunity?" Yeah, stay and be abused, go back and get more abused. Wonderful. Hey, I didn't make Mexico screwed up. They left to pursue another opportunity, this opportunity isn't perfect, so what? It is still better than what they originally had and what they legally should have.

You know, giving in to a rapist rather than fight and be killed might be a better deal. I suppose you're only "not entirely concerned" about that too? Completely different issue, I don't ask the rapist to rape me, the immigrant does ask the employer for a job though. Perhaps it is worse than he may have originally hoped, but it is still better than his other opportunities.


I think some people are too easily offensive. Doesn't work, I didn't offend on purpose. You just are very quick to jump the gun and attack me.


Oh, but they still have options! They have opportunities! Clearly, slaves *like* being slaves because slavery is a better deal! They didn't choose to be enslaved though. Mexicans chose to come over though. You are taking a very different situation and trying to make it the same by ignoring very vital and critical parts of what make the situations what they are.


I don't think you've ever even talked with, let alone understood, migrant workers and how much they get abused, for what "benefits" and by whom. If you did, you would know that is not "all we have" here.
If it isn't then they'd leave. They don't leave though, so either I overstate their intelligence, or it is as I describe as my comment is purely a matter of logic based upon how rational beings would act. The people you speak of probably get all sorts of misbehavior done to them, probably of the sort commonly considered extremely immoral. It still apparently is better than they would get otherwise though as revealed by their actions.


I'm not trying to "shame" you. I don't think you'll have shame. I am simply stating how much you are being offensive. As for bad premises, the euphemisms you are using "additional benefits" and "better opportunity" conceal your underlying belief that this is not even a problem. (You are "not entirely concerned" after all). It's a problem.
I am not being offensive, I am analyzing the issue. If you take offense then STFU. What I state are technical terms, they can be called euphemisms but I simply don't want to use emotionally laden terms to describe any of this as emotions don't bring light to an issue so much as cloud rational thought. Really though, prove it is a problem. I mean, absolutely prove it. Just using what is empirically or logically knowable, prove to me that there is a problem. That means prove a basic framework of morality, then use that to define the situation. I am thoroughly convinced you can't do the former though, and if you can't then leave me the hell alone as I do not come here to have you or any other person moralize for me.

You know, one of the shows I usually listen to when I'm driving in the afternoon is the Jeff Katz show. He is a Jewish conservative who moved to Charlotte, NC from I think L.A. or San. Fran., somewhere in California. Well anyways, back when we had the illegal immigration bill going through Congress, he would fill his radio show about how the bill wasn't a good bill and how the immigrants are invading our country etc. etc. You know, basic xenophobic crap. However, he does make a good point about America's illegal immigration problem. Because these immigrants are not documented, and because they do not have a valid SS #, or a green card or anything that would put them into the system, their employers can pay them pretty much anything they want. Why, because what is the immigrant going to do, go to the Better Business Beau? If they did that, then the BBB would contact the INS and they would get kicked out of the country. The employers also hang the threat of calling the INS over their heads as well if they get out of line. So basically the illegals here will just have to be happy with whatever the employers decide to throw their way. Mr. Katz calls the illegal immigrant the new serf class because of the conditions that exist for them at their job, and I actually think he's right. It does suck for them to be in that position, and they are in that position. It's just a system where they will be the new serf class while everyone else enjoys the fruit of their labors.

Sounds pretty true.

that is one of the biggest problems of unoffical immigration. there are 12 million people in this country with inadequate legal protection. this is as true for violent crimes as it is for breaking wage and safety standards.

it doesnt make them serfs but it does put every illegal worker at the mercy of his employer.

I think serf is an adequate descriptor for them. They're powerless to complain about poor working conditions because they'll be deported. They're as tied to their job as serfs were to the land they farmed.

Hey, I didn't make Mexico screwed up. They left to pursue another opportunity, this opportunity isn't perfect, so what? It is still better than what they originally had and what they legally should have.

Yes yes, and being raped in the ass is better than being raped in the eyeball.

Completely different issue, I don't ask the rapist to rape me, the immigrant does ask the employer for a job though. Perhaps it is worse than he may have originally hoped, but it is still better than his other opportunities.

Just what do you get out of your constant "it could be worse" blustering? Is that your only way of justifying human rights abuses?

Doesn't work, I didn't offend on purpose.

What doesn't work? My thoughts? No, I'm pretty damn sure some people are just too easily offensive.

They didn't choose to be enslaved though. Mexicans chose to come over though.

A choice between illegal immigration and death is not a real choice.

It's the same choice a slave could make. Hey, they didn't have to become slaves. They could fight and die.

The comparison insofar as "opportunities" is quite valid.

If it isn't then they'd leave. They don't leave though, so either I overstate their intelligence, or it is as I describe as my comment is purely a matter of logic based upon how rational beings would act. The people you speak of probably get all sorts of misbehavior done to them, probably of the sort commonly considered extremely immoral. It still apparently is better than they would get otherwise though as revealed by their actions.

I could say the same of slaves and it'd be just as offensive.

I am not being offensive

Yeah - you are.

If you take offense then STFU.

Or I could just continue shredding your half-assed justifications.

What I state are technical terms, they can be called euphemisms but I simply don't want to use emotionally laden terms to describe any of this as emotions don't bring light to an issue so much as cloud rational thought.

Heh. "STFU" is no doubt the height of dispassionate objectivity.

Really though, prove it is a problem. I mean, absolutely prove it. Just using what is empirically or logically knowable, prove to me that there is a problem.

Abuse is wrong and it is a legal and ethical problem. This truth is self-evident.

But I understand if you're playing the sociopathic game in order to again try to justify your lack of concern.

That means prove a basic framework of morality, then use that to define the situation. I am thoroughly convinced you can't do the former though, and if you can't then leave me the hell alone as I do not come here to have you or any other person moralize for me.

Oh, right. I have to prove "morality" in order to show that abuse is wrong. I suppose the same is true for rape, murder, theft and anything else too. Nope, none of those things are wrong... until and unless Greater Trostia can prove it to you...

Get lost.

Completely different issue, I don't ask the rapist to rape me, the immigrant does ask the employer for a job though. Perhaps it is worse than he may have originally hoped, but it is still better than his other opportunities.

So if the company asks the illegal immigrant to cross the border and work for them in violation of the law, does that change anything? Because that happens all the damn time, you know.