0

Cheap Labor

Wichita

Submitted by Tracy Phillips

 

Author unknown.
From a California school teacher - - -"As you listen to the news about
the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things
that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a
large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1
school, meaning that it’s students average lower socioeconomic and
income levels. Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell
Gardens, Huntington Park , etc., where these students are protesting, are also
Title 1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When
I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but
a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make
a Marriott proud. The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and
trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten.
(OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
 
I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least
moderately overweight.  About 75% or more DO have cell phones.  The
school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant
girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the
inconvenience of having to arrange for baby sitters or having family
watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
 
I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing
funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for
anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new
computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month
later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who
obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in
America.
(OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
 
I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute
teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here
in the country less then 3 months who raised so much hell with the
female teachers, calling them "Putas" whores and throwing things that
the teachers were in tears.
 
Free medical, free education, free food, daycare etc., etc., etc.
Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but also to
demand rights, privileges and entitlements?
 
To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants
contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and
housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes:
spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.
 
Higher insurance, medical facilities closing, higher medical costs,
more crime, lower standards of education in our schools, overcrowding,
new diseases etc., etc, etc.
For me, I'll pay more for tomatoes.
 
WE NEED TO WAKE UP.  The guest worker program will be a disaster
because we won't have the guts to enforce it. Does anyone in their
right mind really think they will voluntarily leave and return?
 
There are many hardworking Hispanic/American citizens that contribute
to our country and many that I consider my true friends. We should
encourage and accept those Hispanics who have done it the right and
legal way.
 
It does, however, have everything to do with culture: A third-world
culture that does not value education, that accepts children getting
pregnant and dropping out of school by 15 and that refuses to
assimilate, and an American culture that has become so weak and
worried about "politically correct" that we don't have the will to do
anything about it.
 
CHEAP LABOR?    Isn't that what the whole immigration issue is about?
Business doesn't want to pay a decent wage.
Consumers don't want expensive produce.
Government will tell you Americans don't want the jobs,
but the bottom line is cheap labor. The phrase "cheap labor" is a
myth, a farce, and a lie. There is no such thing as "cheap labor."
(The same as a "free lunch")
 
Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children.
He takes a job for $5.00 or $6.00/hour. At that wage, with six dependents,
he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an
Income Tax Return, he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200
free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and books.
He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI.
Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare.
All of this is at taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners
insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed
material.
He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/ hour in
benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/hour left after
paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayer's also pay for increased crime, graffiti and
trash clean up.
 
Cheap labor?   YEAH RIGHT
tags:
Wichita
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
All I want to point out that an American citizen, similarly situated as the hypothetical "illegal alien" in the above piece, is entitled to receive, and likely does receive, every one of the benefits the author rails about in the piece; and, if being around some (note I say SOME) children of such citizens, their behavior is not measurably different from that which is described in the "article".

Illegal immigration is a problem; no doubt about it. However, broadsides like the above attempt to paint with a broad brush, singling out one group of peoples upon whom to heap all the troubles identified, without considering the fact that such behavior is not limited to the group identified.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Dubya said:
 
Wow.

What is the solution, though? I agree with the need for change, but how?

I recently spoke with a single momn who held three jobs because she refused to go on welfare. She held these three jobs, none of the three of which had any insurance so she was forced to pay out-of-pocket anytime her kids would need serious health care. Most of the time she simply avoided going to the doctor or dentist because they couldn't afford it.

This woman WANTS to work, wants to make a better life for herself and her children, wants to stay independent and free of government assistance...and look at the price she pays compared to the above scenario. A life of misery vs. a life leeching. Deplorable...

But thank God, Angelina and Brad adopted a child from the hell that is Africa...That really goes leaps and bounds towards a solution!

~Dubya
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Dubya said:
 
Agreed, VT.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Gster said:
 
Solving this problem, if it can be done, is going to be VERY EXPENSIVE AND VOLITILE!!

I wonder if our essentially self serving spineless politicos have the stuff to even get started on resolvent?

Sealing the borders is paramount to the solution.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Dubya, the woman of whom you wrote is also cheap labor. Good for her in trying to stay off public assistance; we, as a society, need to figure out how to encourage folks like her without further "sweetening the pot" for those who will come to this country illegally.

I fundamentally understand why those who are here illegally come; they see a way to make a better life for themselves and their families. The abundance of jobs for them points out the issue; at what point do we, the United States, determine that the employers of such folks be punished in such a way as to discourage this conduct. Spend as much money enforcing the labor laws prohibiting this hiring as we are in "sealing the border"? Tightening the punishments to the point it becomes uneconomical to hire an illegal, if caught? I don't have any good answers.

The problem is intractable, IMHO; in a perfect world, there "ought to be a way" to improve economic conditions in the countries from which the illegal workers come to remove the incentives for them to leave. To do so will require incentives to those countries to improve their economies. This will be costly, if it can be done at all. Politically, it is almost a non-starter.

Birth control? A nasty thought, but really; one issue is overpopulation, and the demand on resources which results in the need for additional income to support the family; if there are fewer in the family, this lessens the need for the income. Just some thoughts.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
tracyaphillips said:
 
The letter itself could be written by someone who is against amnesty. (not a teacher) Don't know.

All I know is what Mr. Zappa said.
"We are a nation of laws. Poorly written and randomly enforced."
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Danny said:
 
I'm not entirely certain how to deal with it. I have some thoughts, ranging from punishing employers who knowingly hire an illegal(I mean if an employer goes through all the proper steps in verifying the person can work here, and concludes they can but that person in reality couldn't, the employer shouldn't be punished) to maybe even punishing those who provide living quarters for them.

However, another part of me says, is that being really drastic? Maybe it needs to happen. I really don't know. It does seem like, maybe if we just enforced the laws we currently have, maybe that would be enough, though probably just as costly.

In a related note, the Border Patrol is trying to hire a significantly higher number of agents to work for them. I wonder if attempting to do this by 2008(don't recall the number) if it will some how strain the hiring process and get less qualified or less trained agents?
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
tracyaphillips said:
 
Okay, step one is to admit the problem.
Done.
Step two?
It's against the law to enter the country without going through the system.
Step two?
Enforce, amend, or remove the law.
Do not proceed to step three until step two is done.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Nathan said:
 
I say round them all up, ship them back to where they came from.

Put the military back on the border.

When they shoot some kid, don't come crying like last time and take the military off the border.

Only problem is that everyone is pandering on this one.

 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Nathan: is putting the military on the border a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1871?
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Oops, s/b 1878; my memory is failing, I tell ya what!

Now that the kind gentlemen who are working on the HVAC system have left my premises, back to work.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
gweltha.wkcsc said:
 
VT- You can circumvent that problem by using the Nat Guard, but on a continual basis, I don't think the affected Governors would like that solution.

And don't forget, we also have a northern border that is critical also.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
gweltha, understand that circumvention; however, in my mind, there is a question concerning the "federalization" of the National Guard in those circumstances; does this make them a part of the active military for purposes of the Act?

Your comment about the northern border is well taken as well; however, in terms of illegal immigration for jobs, I've not heard of many problems with the Northern U.S. being overrun by Quebecois looking for work. :-)
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Gster said:
 
VT- That was me- I was thinking of the Guard in the "State" mode rather than the Federal role. I'm not entirely sure if that feasible, however. ??
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
tracyaphillips said:
 
I don't know if ya'll watch any Lou Dobbs, but gawldarnit, sumpin ain't right with shrub and this whole border deal.
Why in the hell would the justice dept back this drug smuggler over our own agents?
By golly, there is sumpin goin on with the 'Bush base' demanding this cheap labor.
Or at least that would seem the only logical answer to this whole scenario.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
I've been listenng some Tracy. I can't find any logical explanation.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Gster, before leaving for a meeting, checked out the Posse Comitatus Act. My memory of its provisions as to the "federalized" National Guard appear to be correct.

Congress could authorize the use of active duty troops on the border, if it so chooses.

Finally, it occurred to me that use of the Coast Guard to do border work would not be prohibited by the Act, as it is technically under Homeland Security. Further checking provides me the answer; it could be so used.
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
gster said:
 
Vaughn- Thanks for the info, it's about what I suspected, but wasn't sure of. Irregardless of what manpower is utilized from where, sealing the borders by that method is going to be VERY costly, and it's not merely a one time thing! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Gary
 
posted 942 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search