0 votes

Immigration - Putting Our Fears to Rest

The following is an except regarding immigration laws from Mary Ruwart's extaordinary book "Healing Our World In an Age of Aggression":

"Those of us in developed nations have great resistance to welcoming refugees and immigrants. We fear that hordes will "invade" our cities, taking our jobs from us, living off welfare that our taxes supply. Our fears, logical though they may seem, are largely groundless.

Many people want to come to developed nations because of the poverty and strife in their own. Moving to a strange country, especially one with a different language or new customs, is difficult. Most Third World immigrants leave their native land only in desperation.

However,...a great deal of the war and poverty in Third World nations is actually created by the developed nations. If we stopped funding dictators who oppress their own people and ended the trade barriers that keep the poor from entering the global marketplace, fewer people would feel the need to leave their homeland.

A common belief in the developed nations is that immigrants are a drain on the economy. In the United States, however, immigrants pay more in taxes than natives do because immigrants tend to be healthy, young adults of working age rather than juveniles or retired dependents. For the same reason, immigrants use fewer tax-subsidised programs (i.e., welfare, health services,and social security) as well. The average immigrant puts $1,300 more per year into the "system" than he or she takes out. (J.L. Simon, Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts (Wahington, DC: Cato Institute, 1995) pp. 31-32).

Of course, a drain on "public" resources would not be an issue if such services were private. People would help refugees to the extent that they chose to do so. No one would be forced to support someone else.

But do immigrants take jobs away from the native population? Apparently not! Numerous studies have shown that immigrants do not cause native unemployment, even among low-paid minorities. Wages for natives do not decrease either. (For a review of these studies, see Simon, pp. 19-30).

[George Washington said, "...the bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions, whom we should welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges".]

The most concentrated immigration influx in modern U.S. history is often referred to as the Mariel boatlift. In 1980, Castro announced that he would allow anyone wishing to go to the United States to leave by boat. Within a couple of months, 125,000 refugees had flooded Miami, increasing the city's workforce by 6-7%. However, Miami's unemployment rate did not increase more rapidly than other areas of the country. Wages for natives, even for low-skilled blacks, were unaffected.

Most of the refugees had few skills and little English. In addition, about 5% were violent criminals or mentally unstable. Some of these "undesirables" were slated for deportation and held in detention camps. However, the Miami economy quickly absorbed the rest of this "wretched refuse". (D Card, "The Impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami," Industrial Relations Section Working Paper #253, May 1989).

[It may be instructive to some immigration opponants at the Dialy Paul to consider the inscription on the Statue of Liberty's pedestal, "Give me your tired, your poor, Your hudled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door".]

Like other immigrants, most Cuban boat people created jobs for Americans by becoming consumers and created jobs for themselves by doing things that Americans wouldn't. For example, immigrants often start their climb up the Ladder of Affluence by picking produce - hard, backbreaking work - all day in the sun. Americans might take these jobs if the pay were better, but costs would be so high that most farmers would would mechanize. More produce would be imported from Mexico or Chile. Without the immigrants, grocery bills in the United States would increase dramatically, harming every consumer.

California gardeners, New York garment makers, and live-in nannies are predominantly immigrants. Without them, Californians would likely have fewer gardens, New York would lose the garment industry to overseas competition, and many career women would find child care so expensive that they couldn't afford to work. (G. Gavin, "No Fruits, No shirts, No Service: The Real World Consequences of Closed Borders, "Reason Online, April 1995).

As immigrants move up the Ladder of Affluence, they create jobs for native-born Americans. Foreign-born immigrants are more likely to be self-employed (Simon, p. 30) and hire others. Many immigrants excel in the technical and engineering sciences and have been key players in the U.S. dominance of the computer industry, which creates jobs for thousands upon thousands of Americans. U.S immigrants help their employers interface with companies in other nations, giving American companies a competitive edge in foreign trade over nations without a diverse cultural base. (Garvin, op.cit.).

[George Gilder, author of Wealth and Poverty, states, "The United States would not be remotely dominant in high-technology industries without immigrants...And at every important high-tech company in America, the crucial players, half of them or more, are immigrants".]

Immigrants often have to work harder because they must overcome employer aversion to their accents and customs. They are less likely to be hired for public relations, telephone, and sales jobs than native-born applicants. Consequently, they substitute hard work in the fields or long hours in the laboratory to create a niche for themselves in the marketplace ecosystem. They create wealth in arenas that workers from the developed world are abandoning. As exploitive as this may seem, immigrants generally feel that working hard in the United States is a much better opportunity than they could get in their native land. They wouldn't relocate othrewise!

More than 40% of Hong Kong's population consists of refugees, yet Hong Kong boasts one of the highest rates of wealth creation in the world. (A. Rabushka, From Adam Smith to the Wealth of America (New Brunswick, NJ; Transaction Books, 1985) p 127). Indeed, in a poll of top economists, 81% agreed that immigration is "very favorable." Another 19% claimed immigration was "slightly favorable." None said that immigration was "slightly" or "very" unfavorable or that they didn't know. (Simon, pp. 47-48)."

Ruwart went on to briefly address the goal of freedom lovers with respect to immigration:

"Without the aggression-through-government that prevents homesteading, all land would be privately owned. Immigrants could only enter with the permission of the owners, who would defend against trespassers. In such a society, churches and other charitable groups would provide a point of entry for new immigrants."

I suspect many businesses would also bring in talanted foreigners when the domestic populace does not provide the needed expertise.

It would be nice to now see immigrant bashing cease on teh Daily Paul.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
reedr3v's picture

Marlow, thank for this great OP.

Ruwart's book is one of the top books to give both newbies and even seasoned libertarians to help them see concrete, peaceful solutions for free people.

She shows in so many ways how freedom and good will just end problems. It is negativity and collectivist mind sets that create the problems and contention that snarl human affairs.

I see below in this thread already a few are jumping to continue the negativity, without having read the book or understanding the consistent pro-liberty philosophical and economic basis for Ruwart's healing vision.

Once again...

You blur the line between illegal immigrants and those that went through the proper channels...

Your book also states dates of contributions that are over a decade old...

And since when did having an open conversation about something become bashing????

It would be nice now to see original debate instead of a cut and past argument from an outdated source...

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies"......

I would agree, that since Ron

I would agree, that since Ron Paul distinguishes between legal immigrants and illegal aliens, no one should be surprised when others do the same(there seems to be some libertarians here who get angry at people who do as Ron Paul does, and makes that distinction). Ron Paul is opposed to illegal immigration, without fear or unfair bashing. He is concerned about it though, which is much different from irrational fear. Many of Ron Paul's supporters, including myself, are the same way.
Ron Paul advocates secure borders, no amnesty(no citizenship) for illegal aliens, enforcing laws related to illegal immigration(including taking action against businesses who knowingly hire illegal aliens)enforcing visa rules, allow local law enforcement to help apprehend illegal aliens(not putting the burden completely on Immigration and Customs Enforcement which is woefully understaffed)who commit other crimes beyond illegal immigration, making English the official language of government in the U.S.
Here are some links to what Ron Paul has said on the issue

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PQdDjvDsVM

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul343.html

As to immigrants not being a drain on the economy, that is debatable, as a recent report show that around half of all immigrant families make use of welfare(we all know Ron Paul would like to get rid of welfare, but its still here and I don't see it going away anytime soon due to too many liberal democrats who want to keep it in place). Here is a link on that
http://cis.org/Camarota/WelfareUseByImmigrants

There is the commonly heard rebuttal, that due to a 1996 law passed by Clinton, illegal aliens are ineligible for welfare benefits. Unfortunately, illegal aliens still can get welfare.
I once gave a ride to someone who needed temporary food stamp assistance, he was not happy about having to do it, but he had been out of work and needed to support his family, he was a proud guy and it hurt him to have to go to the local welfare office, but I did not judge him or say anything negative about it. When we got there, I went in with him and he pointed out to me in surprise that right on the application for food stamps, it said that immigration status is not a factor in deciding eligibility for food stamps. In other words, illegal aliens were eligible for food stamps. Needless to say, he was upset to find that out, after falsely believing for so long that illegal aliens were barred by law from receiving any kind of welfare benefits. I wasn't surprised because I had heard that before from others, but never seen proof with my own eyes until that day.
Another link explains the huge cost to taxpayers(just in LA County alone) due to illegal aliens
http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/24235/

As to cost of produce going up dramatically if illegal aliens were not around to pick produce, here is a link which counters that fear, which is a fear that I have heard many repeat over and over
http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/mskoped110607.html

For those who say Americans won't work the fields any longer,and only illegal aliens will do it, check this link out
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=118219&catid=339

Here is some information on the economic impact of immigration to the United States by a Harvard economist which argues that we are getting too much low-skilled, low education immigrants(something Bill Gates complains about), and we should be admitting more highly educated or highly skilled immigrants, and less low skilled, low education immigrants, like some other countries do
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k6oUOPmaaI

If you want to talk about the impact of more highly educated immigrants moving into technical fields such as computer programming, there is a problem there as well, due to too many companies not following the laws relating to the H-1B visa system(and not just H-1B but other categories of visas as well)and turning their backs on citizens of this country who are looking for work, in some cases completely, in favor of foreign workers, or laying off their citizen workers and making them train their foreign replacements.
There was a law firm who created an uproar due to them telling companies how to avoid hiring U.S. citizen workers and still "appear" to be following the law. Unfortunately, it seems to be a growing trend. Here are some links on that

http://bridgetinthesixth.blogspot.com/2007/06/h2b-visa-fraud...

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/1451/outrage-law-firm-seminar...

http://www.programmersguild.org/docs/cohen.html

One might argue(and I've often heard this argument), its unchristian to oppose illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens. To those that say that, I'd offer these links

http://www.magic-city-news.com/Jan_Herron_59/What_Would_Jesu...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMaNa1K8lJo

On top of all this, one might still argue, well, I disagree with Ron Paul on his position on illegal immigration and border security because I still don't see it as anything to be concerned about. In that case, I'd offer some further links which may give someone like that cause for concern.

(a snip from an article on illegal aliens and identity theft)
The Federal Trade Commission states that, “Identity theft occurs when someone uses your personally identifying information, like your name, SSN, or credit card number, without your permission, to commit fraud or other crimes…. They may get a job using your Social Security number.”

According to a senior Social Security Administration official, roughly 75% percent of illegal aliens use fraudulent Social Security numbers. Thus, according to the FTC definition, all illegal aliens who provide their employers with a Social Security number that belongs to another person are committing identity theft.

Children’s Social Security numbers are highly sought after by illegal aliens because no one checks their credit histories. In Arizona, it is estimated that over one million children have their Social Security numbers being used by adults. In Utah, 1,626 employers were found to be paying wages to the Social Security numbers of children on public assistance under the age of 13.

Individuals whose Social Security numbers are used by someone else suffer real harm. Children may be denied Medicaid benefits, burdened with corrupted credit histories and denied means test educational assistance. Adults whose Social Security numbers are used by illegal aliens may be denied unemployment benefits, have mortgage applications rejected and be saddled with police records and tax liabilities on income that they did not earn. Even medical records may be corrupted with life threatening consequences.

The fact is, that an illegal alien commits up to three felonies just to get a job – document fraud/forgery, perjury on an I-9 form and if any of the information he is using belongs to another person, identity theft/fraud. These are not victimless crimes and police at all levels should be arresting the 75% of illegal aliens who are committing these felonies.
(More at the links below)

http://www.cis.org/articles/2009/back809.pdf

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6814673/

There are those who hear prominent people of Mexican heritage in Mexico and inside the U.S. who seem to advocate(or seem to be happy about) re-taking the southwest U.S.(sometimes referred to as Aztlan), land which was lost during the Mexican-American war, not by armed invasion, but by unarmed invasion, in other words, immigration with an agenda not in the U.S. best interest. I'm aware that not all immigration from Mexico has this agenda, what percentage does is anyones guess, but there is concern that there is enough to warrant caution and taking steps to stop this sort of invasion. Here are some links on that
http://www.asustainableusa.org/articles/article_2004winter.html

http://www.asustainableusa.org/articles/article_2006feb09.html

http://www.asustainableusa.org/articles/article_2006mar31.html

http://www.asustainableusa.org/articles/article_2007mar12.html

http://www.asustainableusa.org/articles/article_2006sep08.html

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/hispanic.asp

It can also be seen as failing to obey the constitution, to protect the U.S. from a form of invasion. Come in legally, repect and follow our laws, and be welcomed by the vast majority of citizens, sneak in illegally, and many will see them as invaders/criminals who have little to no respect for our laws.

Perhaps a few polls taken in the country where most of our illegal immigration comes from, might give you pause, and might cause you to understand why there is cause for concern about illegal immigration.
http://www.zogby.com/soundbites/readclips.cfm?ID=4935

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55496

This article, which covers some things I do not necessarily agree with, does give reasons why there is so much illegal immigration from Mexico into the U.S. and why the Mexican government apparently wants to see this continue
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.4027/pu...

Talking about all of this is not intended to cause fear or hatred towards immigrants or anyone else, but to cause people to realize that illegal immigration and border security, as talked about by Ron Paul in the above links I posted, are real, serious and valid concerns that must be addressed with resolve and determination. The positions he has taken(and the position his supporters have taken who agree with him)are not due to xenophobia, racism, nativism, or hatred/fear of immigrants. Neither Ron Paul, nor I, fit any of those descriptions.
It gets old when Ron Paul and those who agree with him about illegal immigration and border security, are called those names unfairly when its untrue and unwarranted, by some libertarians(which is why I don't call myself a libertarian, even though I agree with them on most issues, but instead a Ron Paul supporter as I don't agree with the libertarian party and their members who say Ron Paul is wrong on this issue and they are right), and many liberal democrats.
I'm aware that there are racists and xenophobes out there who unfortunately attach and insert themselves into any organization or any candidate who is opposed to illegal immigration, and that is unfortunate, but there is not much one can do about that except denounce and/or distance oneself from them.
The solution to the problem of illegal immigration is to implement Ron Paul's plans that I linked to above, and then most illegal aliens will likely leave the country. Making even a half-hearted effort at enforcement has been shown to cause illegal aliens to leave states such as Arizona and Georgia which have passed tough state laws relating to illegal immigration, such as cutting off welfare to illegal aliens and those who knowingly hire illegal aliens illegally can lose their business license. Here is a link on that
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/mexico-complains-too-many-...

One more set of links, since Ron Paul often appears on the Alex Jones show, I'll post some links to two different series that Alex Jones did on the subject of illegal immigration
What Alex Jones saidabout illegal immigration(12 parts on youtube)
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvnS_lqG38o&feature=PlayList&...
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayHJwlbsz8U&feature=related
Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgwAUhYhDWE&feature=related
Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgwAUhYhDWE&feature=related
Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-awD5i13S0&feature=related
Part 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfX_cF7BF3Y&feature=related
Part 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLDjQHIKLo&feature=related
Part 8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BspxyRnfAw&feature=related
Part 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBl07dDz2vk&feature=related
Part 10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C9QkR7o69k&feature=related
Part 11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBPpltHCpKU&feature=related
Part 12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jSVUIHGAA4&feature=related

Alex Jones interviewing Pat Buchanan on illegal immigration, North American Union and New World Order(5 parts)
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXm7BOE_AsE
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDA1dyOdTwU&feature=related
Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9AokTYonl8&feature=related
Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XMz8h2l9fU&feature=related
Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaZSBVOSQJQ&feature=related

Finally, if after reading all of this information, there's someone who still thinks Ron Paul does not have sufficient cause to be concerned about illegal immigration and be opposed to it and have a plan to solve the problem(the main reason I compiled this information and posted it was to counter those who say illegal immigration is not an important issue and Ron Paul nor his supporters shouldn't be concerned about it), then I couldn't help but doubt that you actually read/listened to all the info and understood all the ramifications, but anyone is free to disagree with Ron Paul on this, or any other issue, of course.

Thanks for the great post.

Thanks for the great post. You've given me (and all other interested parties) a wealth of information to consider. This is the approach to controversial subjects I applaud.

marlow

You're welcome, fellow Ron

You're welcome, fellow Ron Paul supporter. It is nice when people can discuss issues calmly and rationally, without losing tempers or resorting to personal attacks/namecalling. I want to thank you for that. Lets set an example for other new people who may be coming in to this site.

You are ignoring important points

You say, "You blur the line between illegal immigrants and those that went through the proper channels..."

Maybe you do but just look at the title of the other thread - "LEGAL Immigration is as bad as illegal" - where you continually weighed in on the side of the thread's creator.

You say, "Your book also states dates of contributions that are over a decade old..."

Fo those who didn't read my original post (its length may have put people off) it cited empirical studies confirming the positive effects of immigration (and put the lie to fears that immigrants cost jobs and income for non-immigrant citizens). I then cited a survey wherein 100% of prominant economists agree immigration is desireable. Economists, such as Keynesians and Austrians, may differ on some things but on the issue of immigration they unanimoulsy favor it. The point is the truth of economic theory - which is universally true over time - was substantiated by the empirical studies cited. The economic principles that are without dispute in the economics profession are bolstered by the cited empirical studies. For you to complain the empirical studies are not sufficiently current in now way invalidates the theory. You don't even cite more current studies that contradict theory. Nor, of course, do you attempt to explain why the entire economics profession is wrong but you are correct in doubting immigratin's positive effects.

You say, "And since when did having an open conversation about something become bashing????"

While I too welcome a civil discussion of the immigration issue some anti-immigrant posters have stooped to "bashing" which I suggested they cease.

Here are a few "immigrant bashing" comments from a couple immigration threads:

"I also believe we are be bombarded with additional tax burden by having to support people who are not even worthy since they are not citizens of our great nation, and are leaching off of our hard earned tax dollars."

"I don't like slugs-they eat the food in gardens,just as hungry immigrants will"

"The NWO chose many of the immigrants
to foment unrest,change our identity
and customs--to weaken us!! And YOU
wish it to continue....
But,don't you hate tripping over all
those strange people kneeling in prayer?
Remember them--they who refuse to adopt our ways?"

Finally, you say, "It would be nice now to see original debate instead of a cut and past argument from an outdated source..."

Apparently your desire for an "open discussion" does not include the thought of Mary Ruwart, one of the libertarian movement's highly respected voices, expressed here with substantiated facts, logic and compassion for all concerned. BTW, Mary Ruwart'S book was endorsed by Ron Paul, who is quoted on the cover saying, "Healing Our World bridges the gap between conservatives and liberals, Christians and New Agers, special interests and the common good, with practical solutions to our societal woes".

I was paricularly impressed by her quoting George Gilder, an acknowledged expert on the high tech industry, that there would be no high tech industry without immigrants. Imagine the U.S. economy without high tech. Huge swathes of the economy would not exist. That's where anti-immigration sentiment leads.

marlow