Bu$h's New Immigrant Worker Plan

[Sabocat]

Yesterday, Bu$h announced his new immigrant worker plan allowing companies to import workers to be exploited. As usual, corporations all around the U$ hailed this new plan.

Bush unveils “bracero” program for immigrant workers
By Bill Vann
9 January 2004


In a gesture steeped in political cynicism, President Bush Wednesday advanced a vague proposal for granting a limited and temporary legal status to as many as 12 million undocumented immigrants in the US. Bush touted the plan as a more “humane” approach than the current system, but the US president’s proposal is heavily weighted in the interests of the corporations and employers. If implemented, it would create a legal framework for maintaining a tier of second-class and super-exploited labor in America.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/.../immi-j09.shtml (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/immi-j09.shtml)

[Y2A]

Yes, and if he closed the border, you'd call him a nationalist pig. That's all you do, try and find anything to attack the U.S on, pathetic really.

P.S. I hate GWB I am just pointing out far-left hypocracy.

[lucid]

Originally posted by Disg[email protected] 9 2004, 06:22 PM
Yesterday, Bu$h announced his new immigrant worker plan allowing companies to import workers to be exploited. As usual, corporations all around the U$ hailed this new plan.


Make sure no one mentions that these people where coming to the US anyway. It wouldn't sound as good if we didn't make it look like Bush was forcing them at gunpoint to come in to our country. I heard they have a super secret under ground railroad that is used to transfer mexicans back and forth between their jobs and the cel bush keeps them in.

Lets also forget to mention that some of these people were paying taxes but not getting any of the benefits.

[Sabocat]

First, I don't think there should be any borders at all, but yes GW is a nationalistic pig. I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks.

Are you saying it's okay for the U$ to allow companies to import workers, basically creating an indentured servitude class?


Lucid, have you ever heard the stories of the big Agri business farmers hiring migrant labor help for the day or week, and then calling the INS to come get them before they had to pay them? I suppose that's okay too eh?

[Hate Is Art]

of course it is, it's capitilism!

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 06:34 PM
First, I don't think there should be any borders at all, but yes GW is a nationalistic pig. I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks.

Are you saying it's okay for the U$ to allow companies to import workers, basically creating an indentured servitude class?


Lucid, have you ever heard the stories of the big Agri business farmers hiring migrant labor help for the day or week, and then calling the INS to come get them before they had to pay them? I suppose that's okay too eh?
I havn't heard of Agri. But it doesn't make a difference. The bottom line is that now these people have the freedom (I know you hate that word) to come to the US and work if they FEEL the need to do so. No one is forcing them. Hell they don't even live in this country! But the citizens of Mexico no that they can come to the US and make more money than they could at home. The US doesn't owe them anything. But we are folding to public opinion and will give more even though people like you will say we are just using them. The US could completely close the borders and we would be fine. We would survive! Some of the Mexicans citizens may not.

[LSD]

The US could completely close the borders and we would be fine. We would survive! Some of the Mexicans citizens may not.

Are you kidding?? If the US and US corporations pulled out of the third world, the US economy would collapse tommorrow.

[iloveatomickitten]

I may be wrong but is the status offered no just temporary, and if im right on this does it not seem as simply a way of getting them on record then deporting them when they're no longer needed?

[lucid]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 9 2004, 06:46 PM

The US could completely close the borders and we would be fine. We would survive! Some of the Mexicans citizens may not.

Are you kidding?? If the US and US corporations pulled out of the third world, the US economy would collapse tommorrow.
I didn't say pull out of the third world. They need us as much as we need them. But if we kicked the Mexican workers out and didn't let them back in we would adjust.

[LSD]

I didn't say pull out of the third world. They need us as much as we need them.

They don't need you, you need them. The people of the third world have not bennefitted from globalization, a select few has. But please don't trust me, trust UN-Habitat:



Originally posted by The Guardian 11 October 2003

Globalization, say the authors, has partly caused and greatly exacerbated the perilous social and physical condition of slum dwellers. While the liberalization of all economies may have offered opportunities for a few entrepreneurs and for cities to act in their own right, the report says that the new insecurities that globalization has created are legion, with barely any benefits going to the poor.

In the past decade — the period of the greatest wealth creation in history, and the largest growth in cities ever recorded — the rich have gained and the poor have lost. Some developing countries would have done better to stay out of the globalization process altogether if they had the interests of their own people in mind, it hazards.

The authors argue that the few benefits going to the slum dwellers have been far outweighed by the disadvantages. They’ve lost jobs, seen their land grabbed by the rich, pay more for privatized basic services, their social cohesion has been damaged and none of the wealth accumulated by the few has “trickled down”. In cities like Dhaka, Bangladesh, the slum dwellers range from established communities — which have been living in the city center for decades — to thousands of newcomers living in squatter settlements, set up on waste ground or on rubbish dumps. All may be moved on by the city authorities or private sector landlords. Tens of thousands of people moved when trade protection barriers were pulled down, making cotton or rice growing unprofitable. Many more have been displaced by the global shrimp industry which has taken over vast tracts of former rice land.


But if we kicked the Mexican workers out and didn't let them back in we would adjust.

Adjust yes, but it would hurt the economy gravely

[Sam Adams]

"Are you saying it's okay for the U$ to allow companies to import workers"

would you prefer they stay in their homeland and starve?

[Sabocat]

I would prefer that they could stay in their homelands and live a dignified life without subversion from the U$ in the form of un-repayable IMF debt, or subverted elections, or removal (CIA backed coups) of democratically elected presidents. I would prefer that all current nations be self determining.

Is that really too much to ask?

[Guerilla22]

:ph34r: This plan has a hidden agenda, as most of Bush's plans usually do. Like all other Bush policies this plan is meant to cater to big corporations.

In a nutshell this is what this plan will do; allow immigrants to stay in the country, without having any rights, most of all it will expand the number of places immigrants can work (such as Wal-Mart, McDonalds) withot needing a work visa, thus enabling companies to be able to hire these immigrants on full time at wages under minumum wage. Doesn't everyone see what's happeniing here?

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 06:34 PM
First, I don't think there should be any borders at all, but yes GW is a nationalistic pig. I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks.

Are you saying it's okay for the U$ to allow companies to import workers, basically creating an indentured servitude class?


Lucid, have you ever heard the stories of the big Agri business farmers hiring migrant labor help for the day or week, and then calling the INS to come get them before they had to pay them? I suppose that's okay too eh?
YOURe a retard.

What the fuck do you think does immigrants would be doing int their homelands? dying of starvation cause they have no jobs, thats what. YOure a complete retard. Now your agianst immigration to the USA? WTF.
Aske El brujo why his family came to the USA.

[Sam Adams]

right.... These immigrants will undoubtably live better lives in the land of the free than they would otherwise.

Is that a bad thing?

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 10:43 PM
I would prefer that they could stay in their homelands and live a dignified life without subversion from the U$ in the form of un-repayable IMF debt, or subverted elections, or removal (CIA backed coups) of democratically elected presidents. I would prefer that all current nations be self determining.

Is that really too much to ask?
YOure really just a complete , moron.
SO YOU WANT THESE PEOPLE TO DIE (with their dignity of course) of starvation in their countries because they cant get a job.

You have no idea the poverty that does people go thorugh. Its the same with the africans that go to Europe.

Youre really a sick fuck.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Sam [email protected] 10 2004, 01:03 AM
right.... These immigrants will undoubtably live better lives in the land of the free than they would otherwise.

Is that a bad thing?
The majority wont be paid like American Citizens...illegal immagrant labor is cheaper and you know it.

This is just a source of cheap labor. Now I think that these people have a right to try and make a better life for themselves and I pplaud their hard work. But honestly I see this as nothing more than exploitation. Giving these people the right to temporarily live in America (or eventually get into the Nation legally) is a simple and small concession

[Stalinator]

Every wins under Bush's plan.

[Domino]

Originally posted by el_pr[email protected] 9 2004, 07:02 PM
What the fuck do you think does immigrants would be doing int their homelands? dying of starvation cause they have no jobs, thats what. YOure a complete retard. Now your agianst immigration to the USA? WTF.
They don&#39;t go to the U&#036; cause it is the U&#036;. If Canada was above us they would go to Canada. <_< You&#39;re the retard anyway, try using the shift key.

[Nelson Mandela]

If everyone beneftis, what&#39;s the problem? The immigrants are obviously much better off. So the corporations benefit as well. Big deal. If trying to help everyone have a better life is wrong, I don&#39;t wannabe right.

[Ymir]

If everyone beneftis, what&#39;s the problem?

Is everyone really "benefitting"? Are Americans native to the U.S. benefiting from having to compete with foreign labour? No. Are the immigrants benefitting? Perhaps temporarily they benefit from subsistence money...but they are just being exploited under capitalism. And what happens after their 3-year limit has run out? Will Bush deport them? That certainly wouldn&#39;t be good. And what if they stay? That&#39;s another dozen LEGAL citizens. We aren&#39;t even counting the growing number of ILLEGALS.

If Bush&#39;s immigrant reform is successful:
-American citizens will lose jobs
-Immigrants will be deported after 3 years for doing hard labour
-Capitalists make MORE money...

I personally want more gains for U.S. workers, and less exploited immigrant workers.

We have to say NO to Bush.

[el_profe]

Originally posted by tetelives+Jan 10 2004, 02:50 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (tetelives @ Jan 10 2004, 02:50 AM)
[email protected] 9 2004, 07:02 PM
What the fuck do you think does immigrants would be doing int their homelands? dying of starvation cause they have no jobs, thats what. YOure a complete retard. Now your agianst immigration to the USA? WTF.
They don&#39;t go to the U&#036; cause it is the U&#036;. If Canada was above us they would go to Canada. <_< You&#39;re the retard anyway, try using the shift key. [/b]
What???
The fact is the leave mexico to find a better life.
Disgustapated wants them to starve to death in their nation rather than go to the USA.

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2004, 03:37 AM

If everyone beneftis, what&#39;s the problem?

Is everyone really "benefitting"? Are Americans native to the U.S. benefiting from having to compete with foreign labour? No. Are the immigrants benefitting? Perhaps temporarily they benefit from subsistence money...but they are just being exploited under capitalism. And what happens after their 3-year limit has run out? Will Bush deport them? That certainly wouldn&#39;t be good. And what if they stay? That&#39;s another dozen LEGAL citizens. We aren&#39;t even counting the growing number of ILLEGALS.

If Bush&#39;s immigrant reform is successful:
-American citizens will lose jobs
-Immigrants will be deported after 3 years for doing hard labour
-Capitalists make MORE money...

I personally want more gains for U.S. workers, and less exploited immigrant workers.

We have to say NO to Bush.
?? so your against immigration, thats nice. Castro and Stalin where also against immigration.

[Ymir]

Your comment isn&#39;t very constructive.

[timbaly]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 11:15 PM
?? so your against immigration, thats nice. Castro and Stalin where also against immigration.
I&#39;m against illegal immigration becasue it will only create a work force within the US that will be exploited by being paid under minimum wage. It happens all the time and unless the flow of aliens is prevented it will continue to happen. Legal immigration is fine, legal immigrants have official documents that will prevent them from being paied under minimum wage, they can go to the gov&#39;t for help if need be and there will be no threat of deportation. The illegals within the nation currently should be given some form or degree of legal status but the borders should be sealed, perhaps militarized to prevent more illegals from entering the country. This would prevent further explotation since minimum wage laws would, or atleast should be inforced for the newly legalized workers.

[Guerilla22]

Originally posted by Nelson [email protected] 10 2004, 02:56 AM
If everyone beneftis, what&#39;s the problem? The immigrants are obviously much better off. So the corporations benefit as well. Big deal. If trying to help everyone have a better life is wrong, I don&#39;t wannabe right.
Thanks for that great insight Nelson, Do you not believe that by allowing immigrants to work without a work permitt that they will really be paid fair wages? And don&#39;t you think this will cost American jobs at the same time immigrants are being exploited?

[Nelson Mandela]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2004, 06:03 AM
Thanks for that great insight Nelson, Do you not believe that by allowing immigrants to work without a work permitt that they will really be paid fair wages?
The immigrants aren&#39;t exploited if they&#39;re better off under this system.


And don&#39;t you think this will cost American jobs at the same time immigrants are being exploited?

No because Americans wouldn&#39;t want these jobs anyway. If an American had them, he&#39;d have to be paid minmum wage.

[Valishin]

Are you kidding?? If the US and US corporations pulled out of the third world, the US economy would collapse tommorrow
It would do no such a thing. It would be felt as prices adjusted acordingly but it would most definatly not collapse.


They don&#39;t need you, you need them.
And without us they are going to get jobs from where?


I would prefer that they could stay in their homelands and live a dignified life without subversion from the U&#036; in the form of un-repayable IMF debt, or subverted elections, or removal (CIA backed coups) of democratically elected presidents. I would prefer that all current nations be self determining.
And how long do you think the economies of many of those countries will last without the US backing them or proping them up with aid? Think about what you ask for for, because you just might get it.


If everyone beneftis, what&#39;s the problem? The immigrants are obviously much better off. So the corporations benefit as well. Big deal. If trying to help everyone have a better life is wrong, I don&#39;t wannabe right.
Apparently anything that benifits corporations is evil.


Are Americans native to the U.S. benefiting from having to compete with foreign labour?
Well they were here working anyway, at least this way they will be paying taxes.



You guys realize that if this situation is so bad, they always have the option to simply stay where they are and not come to the US and have themselves exploited.

The real problem I have with this though are the ones who will come here and have their childern. Which automaticly makes the kids american. Creating a conflict with illegal parents and legal childern. This does happen already but it is an issue that needs to be addressed. Inviting more of it isn&#39;t the best move.

[(*]

This is just a proposal right? I will have to wait until more details are put out before I decide on a concrete position regarding this.

From what I understand, immigrant workers will be protected under current labor laws.

Yes, they may be exploited in the USA, but they will probably be exploited back home as well (where ever that may be).

[LSD]

It would do no such a thing. It would be felt as prices adjusted acordingly but it would most definatly not collapse.

I don&#39;t think you realize how invested the US economy is in the third world. So much labour has been moved out that to bring it all back would be devastating. If cororations had to pay minimum wage to the equivalent of all of the workers they presently pay far less, they would soon cease being profitable. Not to mention having to conform with ameriacn environmental regulations and labour standard laws and working condition safety laws etc..... Furthermore there aren&#39;t even enough Americans to fill the menial positions that would suddenly be thrown open. Supply would drop dramatically, but the artifically stimulated demand, which producers have been bloating for decades, remains. The economy cannot support its own infastructure. So yes, it would collapse.



They don&#39;t need you, you need them.

And without us they are going to get jobs from where?

1) you&#39;re assuming those countries must be capitalistic and 2) you&#39;re assuming that no third world country can be self-sustaining. Globalization has not helped. (see the Guardian article I posted earlier)


And how long do you think the economies of many of those countries will last without the US backing them or proping them up with aid? Think about what you ask for for, because you just might get it.

You&#39;re right, the people the US is "proping up" will not last long: Namely, the rich and elite of those countries. Your precious "economy" would take a hit too, but it is an economy which is not helping the people so it is an economy which should be allowed to die. You are making the same arguments that England made for staying in India for 300 years. "They need us, we support them, what would they do without us?" But they were wrong and you were wrong, the United States had no more right to subjugate the rest of the world in its noeliberal globalized hegemony any more than England had to subjugate the world under its imperial one.

[Y2A]

As I said before, if he would have made immigration laws stricter then you would have attacked him for that. It doesn&#39;t matter what he does only that it is him doing it. It&#39;s pointless and proves you are all hypocrites.

[timbaly]

I would like to add more to my previous post. If the borders are militarized or sealed by another means this would prevent illegals from entering the US and being exploited here by most likely not being paid minimum wage. However if the bordrs are sealed and illegals are not allowed into the US they will still be bad conditions, in most cases it will be worse than being in the US. They will end up getting paid very little either way. However if they&#39;re in they make it to the US and are allowed to become legalized this could cause problems as well. If there is not border sealing mass amounts of third worlders will be coming to the US because they know they&#39;ll be legal once they get in. The third world workers are more likely to settle for lower pay than Americans since what is considered low pay in the US is still more than what they would be making outside the country. Employers will now probably hire more immigrant workers since they&#39;re willing to get paid less for the same jobs. This could bring wages in general lower than they already are and native born Americans will be less likely to be hired since they&#39;re less likely to tolerate the lower wages, but if they do tolerate them they will be working the same job but will be paid less than before due to more immigrant workers that will be looking for jobs. So the more I think about it the more uncertain I am on what it is that should be done.

Y2A, you&#39;ve definetely discovered the mindset of a vast amount of our members here. I know many of them hate the US for simply being the US, I don&#39;t think most of them realize that if any other nation were in the US&#39;s position they would be doing the same things. Although I belive your point to be valid that there are many hypocrits here i just wish you wouldn&#39;t generalize. Rather than say "It&#39;s pointless and proves you are all hypocrites." You should say something like " It proves that many of you are hypocrits." Not everyone here is a hypocrit, thought the percentage of hypocrits seems to be on the rise.

[Sandino111]

Originally posted by Sam [email protected] 10 2004, 01:03 AM
right.... These immigrants will undoubtably live better lives in the land of the free than they would otherwise.

Is that a bad thing?
Well Said, but how do we make the American conservatives realize this?

[JustSoul]

They are not hypocrites sadly. They are just 14 year old morons.

[Ymir]

As I said before, if he would have made immigration laws stricter then you would have attacked him for that. It doesn&#39;t matter what he does only that it is him doing it. It&#39;s pointless and proves you are all hypocrites.

If Bush had proposed STRICTER immigration laws (or maybe just enforced the current ones) I would have said he made a good decision for once.


The immigrants aren&#39;t exploited if they&#39;re better off under this system.

No...they are still exploited, but in better conditions.


No because Americans wouldn&#39;t want these jobs anyway. If an American had them, he&#39;d have to be paid minmum wage.

What are "these jobs"? Mowing lawns, washing dishes, housecleaning? Alot of non-corporate basic labour can be done by teenagers etc. I&#39;m pretty sure whatever these jobs are, Americans will do them.