In my humble opinion, we have a horrendous problem here in the United States... that being how we think of and treat those who cross our borders, albeit illegally, in order to make a better life for themselves, because they feel they have no other choice.
We lump these undocumented immigrant farm workers together with those who would cross our borders to cause harm through violence and drug trafficking and thereby sooth our consciences as to the ways that they are treated here in the great United States of America. We conveniently forget that many of these workers were brought here and are exploited by the very people they work for, and that they have little or no recourse for obtaining justice under our laws. While slavery may not legally exist within the USA, never-the-less, many immigrant farm workers are treated little better than those slaves of history past.
We hide behind present legalities and economic situations, contending that [undocumented] immigrant farm workers are taking jobs away from "good red-blooded Americans" who are in desperate need of employment. While I don't doubt that in these times there are thousands of good red-blooded Americans in desperate need of employment, I sincerely doubt that many of them would want to endure the harsh working conditions and low pay associated with migrant farm work.
And while this type of farm work is back-breakingly hard, it is needed!! Crops cannot harvest themselves. Although there have been technological advances in mechanical harvesting, reducing labor needs and harvest costs, which allow farmers to remain competitive in the world market, there are still many crops that are hand-harvested. According to authors James F. Thompson and Steven C. Blank in a research article entitled Harvest Mechanization Helps Agriculture Remain Competitive "much effort has been devoted to these crops [current crops still hand-harvested], but in the last 20 years there have been only a few advancements in developing commercial harvesters."
Surely we in this great nation of ours can find a way to come together to reform immigration policies, so that people who need work [even if they come from our neighboring country to the south], can legally find it in the US, so they will not be exploited by those for whom they work and will not have to live in fear of their employers as well as our police forces, and in the process of working in our country, contribute to its economic growth.
Ahhh... but perhaps, giving workers from our neighboring country to the south the ability to legally enter our country for work purposes, possibly reducing the exploitation they suffer, giving them legal recourse for justice, and thereby eliminating the near-slave status they endure, is something that those with power to make such changes do not really want... after all, the workers might not want to work down on the farm anymore... and then where would we be?
This morning I watched a YouTube video of Steve Colbert as he testified before a House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Security. He has done a marvelous job of using satire to comment on the issue of immigration reform. I offer this for some thought-provoking enjoyment!
6 comments:
Really well put, in my humble opinion!
test comment...
When one person immigrates to another country, that person is asking the other country to do him/her a favor. Namely, admission inside a home belonging to someone else.
Look, if I own a house and I tell someone who wants to come and live there "No", I'm not doing that person any wrong. It doesn't matter if they're poor or need work -- or even if I need someone to work in my house. I'm not under any obligation to yield my property to someone else if I don't want to.
Likewise, a nation may grant admission if it likes -- or not. I like the way that John Derbyshire (a native Briton who became a US citizen) put it:
Nor is an immigrant exercising any transcendent human right. Who on earth ever thought so? If I seek to settle in Country X, I am asking Country X a favor, which the authorities there might properly refuse. If they do refuse, I have no grounds for complaint. It's their country.
A story: I grew up listening to my dad rhapsodize about New Zealand, where he had spent the happiest days of his life. Thus enthused, after graduating college and working a couple of years, I decided to give New Zealand a try. I went to New Zealand House in London. There was a guy at a desk in the lobby. I approached him and stated my purpose. He pushed a printed sheet of paper at me. It was a list of occupations, most of them skilled manual trades — carpenters, electricians, and an astonishing number of things to do with sheep. "You in any of those occupations?" asked the Kiwi. Me: "No. I'm a computer programmer." He took back the sheet and scrutinized it. "Nope. Don't see it. I guess we've got all we need. Sorry!"
I never did get to see New Zealand. I did, though, walk out of New Zealand House with a grudging respect for the clarity and rationality of their immigration procedures. (Forty years on, they maintain those high standards. They recently denied a settlement visa to a British woman on the grounds that she was too fat.)
That is immigration policy as it should be practiced, with a calm eye to the national interest and some thought-out notions of who you want settling in your country, and who you don't want. It's your country, built up and fought for by you, your parents, and your ancestors. Foreigners should follow your rules or go find some other country to apply to. If admitted for settlement, they should expect to pass through a probationary period when they undergo some surveillance and have fewer rights in law than citizens have.
We lump these undocumented immigrant farm workers
Question: if I hold up a bank for, oh, $50,000 or so, am I stealing or making an "undocumented" withdrawal?
John, obviously if you are holding up a bank, you are stealing.... but the point is that undocumented workers who are here in the US working our fields, and causing no difficulties, should not be thought of in the same way as one might think of an undocumented individual who sneaks across the border to commit an act of violence, or traffic in drugs, or traffic in humans, etc. Yes, both are here illegally, as our immigration laws now stand... but I say that the difference in how they are regarded should be in their motivation for being here...
I believe that we need individuals who are willing to work as seasonal farm workers... there are many crops that would not get picked without them... and there is a shortage of people willing to do that job, because it is very hard work... would our economy suffer more if farms had to stop producing their crops because there was no one to pick the crops? I don't know... I am not an economist... but at the very least, the people who owned the farms, or the corporation who owned them would be harmed economically if they had to shut down their businesses because of a lack or shortage of workers...
so what would be so bad about finding some way to allow people to come across the border to work as seasonal workers, and give them a certain type of legal status, for example maybe a work permit... they would then be "documented"... if the government felt it necessary, with the technology available, their movements could be tracked... the workers would have a certain amount of recourse under our laws should they be exploited, raped, or had some other crime committed against them... they could be considered visiting workers... their wages could be taxed... they could be required to renew their work permits every so often, and any that did cause problems could be denied a new one... they could perhaps even be charged a fee for their work permit - a registration fee, much like we are charged a fee for our car tags and our drivers' licenses...
but I do not think they should be treated unfairly, and with no compassion... no, we don't have to allow people from other countries legal entrance into ours [temporarily, for seasonal work purposes] so that they can work in our fields, but I don't see why it would hurt...
of course, if there is a sudden upswelling of American citizens that want to work these jobs, then they of course should be given preference over non-citizens [assuming that said citizens weren't bank robbers, or something like that]...
I believe that we need individuals who are willing to work as seasonal farm workers... there are many crops that would not get picked without them... and there is a shortage of people willing to do that job, because it is very hard work...
There are plenty of people willing to pick tomatoes. It's just that these agricultural companies don't want to pay workers enough money. If they raised their wages, they'd find plenty of workers. Shoot, if you pay Bill Gates enough money, he'll pick tomatoes.
For that matter, if these companies decided to pay only 10 cents an hour, they wouldn't even be able to find impoverished Mexicans willing to take them up on the deal. Could they then whine that they couldn't find any workers? Sure. But the fault would be their own -- just like it is now.
What's the harm in letting migrant workers cross the border temporarily to work in the fields? Not much, except to the other poor people in America who won't have jobs because these migrant workers are depressing the domestic labor market.
Also: is it really temporary? Do they actually return across the border? Or do they stay here? Even with a border wall, once they are here, it would be hard to keep track of them.
Post a Comment