Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
one could argue that the same economic ideology is behind the curent "problem" of migrant laborforces (documented and otherwise)---a way to deal with it is not to fence borders, mobilize the military to walk back and forth near the fences, or to make arbitrary declarations about the national language (all neofascist-style responses) but to undertake the development and implementation of models for econoic activity that encourage and sustain local autonomy.
|
I am confused by your discussion of neoliberalism especially as it pertains to third world economies (our neighbors to the south) in comparison to the U.S. I am so lost that I don't even know what questions to ask for clarification but then I have no formal training in economics.
One thing seems clear to me though and that is that the economic system here is extremely attractive to those from the countries to the south of us and they are coming here in great numbers searching for a better life (or at least a means to make money) which they cannot easily get in their countries of origin.
The poor populations of these countries are increasing rapidly and the inclination to migrate north to the U.S. seems to be increasing. I don't understand why you consider the building of fences or other means to try and control the millions of illegal immigrants to be a "neofascist-style" response. Without large scale changes in their home countries, which we have little control over, what other method of immigration control do we have?
Twenty years ago under the Reagan administration approx. three million illegals were granted amnesty and now we have about 5 times that many or about 15 million. If we don't control the border and grant amnesty again will we have 5 times 15 or 75 million illegals in twenty years? Is this a good thing?
Sorry about the threadjack but the other immigration thread seems to be dead so I thought I would reply to your post here since you brought it up.