How quaint is not that free labour can be cheaper (though not always) than slave labour such that slave labour loses its relative economic value? How quaint that the condition of free labour weren't really that different from slavery except for the right to 'leave'. However slavery was all-in-all ultimately outlawed not merely 'phased out'. What do Libertarians think of slave-owners who tried to hold out to the end and how they hated government telling them what to do about slavery? Let alone the Confederates who thought that should Negros be protected from slavery with the Declaration of Independence then that document is fundamentally wrong?

By the same token, how quaint the immigration debate keeps coming back to Mexico? Why is that? Why not Europe or China or South America or Africa? Cheap labour south of the border? Native-born Americans would be working for $5 a day if it weren't dang guvmint hence the need to look abroad?

On the other, Australians are kicking themselves that they lost Dr Zhengrong Shi. He wanted $7 million to start a solar panel company, he was knocked back, he went to China where they are trying to 'brain-drain' other countries, he get the money, founds SunTech and the rest is, as they say, is history. B'oh!

If you think this is because the proximity of Latin America makes for an easy escape from the FBI, tell me why not even one Canadian is on that list?

From a purely economic perspective, it has been proven that slave labor couldn't compete with free labor and that fact was the primary reason slavery eventually ended in societies that had both free and slave labor. What this means is that slave holder costs of taking care of slaves was higher than what he would have paid them had they been free.

A better question would be if the decendants of slaves could sue those who originally sold them into slavery.

Taxation without representation should be the entry fee to get in.

Personally, if we were more libertarian, I couldn't care less who comes to this country, and either should anyone. If we weren't a welfare state, they'd add to the GNP, contrary to what those suffering from Dobbs syndrome believe. However, because we are a welfare state and immigrants tend to subsist on the lower rungs of the social order, they might have to be subsidized like the other losers in this country.

I think legal immigration should be expanded so the only people denied entry are provable and specific threats to the public: e.g., foreign agents, terrorists, violent felons, and carriers of contagion.

Under those circumstances, illegal immigration is not merely less attractive: it is virtually unheard of.

I live in a rural area where there are a lot of illegals (not all of whom were Mexicans) every summer and fall (the part of Michigan that I live in is a major producer of fruits and other crops). I once dated one on and off over a span of several years (staying up here simply wasn't an option to her as her family needed her help, so she'd find me when ever she came back up for the growing and harvesting season). I've also lived near major cities that do have large illegal populations. In addition to that, I have family members who live and have lived in areas in Texas, Florida, and California with large populations of illegals. Neither I nor they think it's much of a problem beyond having a hard time understanding some of them when going to restaurants and other places where they tend to work. The problems associated with illegals are the result of things like education, their status as illegals, the war on drugs, and the war on fathers. They are not a part of the cultures of any Mexicans, Hondurans, El Salvadorians, and so on. These people are, for the most part, hard-working people who are all-but forced to live miserable lives because of governmental policies aimed at protecting the jobs of poor Americans (though this is a cliche, it's a true one: illegals aren't coming here and taking the jobs of doctors, architects, lawyers, upper-management, and other such people).

By the way, for those of you who believe that their culture is ruining America, go live in any major American city. In every major American city, there are ethnic enclaves whose cultures are radically different than the culture of the surrounding areas. Chicago, Detroit, New York, and Los Angeles have ethnic enclaves and are richer for it (heck, even in my small town the small population of Poles all seem to have congregated in one area).

So are you saying the general republican view is toward amnesty??? I think you need to go back a reread your history and remember who was against the pres. and those TWO senators.

Wow! They crossed a line. What a terrible crime.

My neighbors down the street let their kids drop out of school. One of them stole my lawnmower.

I'm guessing without a high school education that crime will be their career, because they sure have not shown a willingness to work hard.

My guess is if they were in Mexico, they would be the ones without enough ambition to cross the border. Either that, or too scared.

The way I figure it, there are 3 seats open at school here in town to anyone who wants to learn something.

Someone is going to have to take care of the 3 useless kids down the street during the times they are out of prison.

How will that help?
People come here illegally because they know that there is work.
Once upon a time Americans used to clean toilets, pick lettuce, and work in egg farms and slaughter houses.
Now Americans can afford to turn their nose to such work, while getting a check from the government.

Illegal immigration is an unintended consequence of the welfare state.

Expanding legal immigration won't help, because the people who come here legally do not come here to clean toilets and pick lettuce.

I agree with MikeP. Legal immigration should be expanded so that illegal immigration is less attractive. Pressure on Mexico for more cooperation in extraditing criminals back to the U.S. to stand trial for their crimes in the U.S. would also be a good idea.

Same old song and dance. Government creates a problem, and the solution involves more government.

What do they say about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Is anyone minding the store over at the Fed?

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/05.09/mindingthestore.html

And wall advocates love to quote Reagan when it suits them [when not in xenophobic mode]. Though they seem to forget everything when going into mode: such as the last few paragraphs of his farewell address and the June '87 to the people of West Berlin.

Shouldn't we be fighting Federal Government involvement in "public services" rather than assigning more responsibility to the government vis-a-vis closing the borders?

Great response. Why this is not the default reply to such concerns is beyond me. All-caps Merlin should really do some soul searching. Gil already has, I suspect.

"Or for that matter how does bringing in cheap labour amount to general productive growth for a nation?

Posted by: Gil | Jun 23, 2009 3:46:16 AM"

Please tell me that you don't hold a driver's license, or ever pick up sharp objects.

This is obvious given the Republican's stance on immigration and their overwhelming victory in the last elections… oh wait…