Oklahoma moves to solve "illegal immigrant" problem.

[Zeb_Carter]

...

The solution to the problem is to create decent paying jobs south of the border. However, by now, the remittted wages from the illigal immigrants are a large part of the money earned in at least Mexico.

...

Isn't that what NAFTA was supposed to do????

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Isn't that what NAFTA was supposed to do????

That is what happened, Zeb. The problem is of the 109 or 110 millions in Mexico, about 50 millions were left out and left indigent. Those are the ones we are having to deal with here.

 

[rgraham666]

No, NAFTA was meant to make it easy for corporations to move their production to places where wages and standards were lower, thus making manufacturing cheaper.

It worked for a while. Then China came on the scene and the jobs moved from Mexico to China.

 

[R. Richard]

No, NAFTA was meant to make it easy for corporations to move their production to places where wages and standards were lower, thus making manufacturing cheaper.

It worked for a while. Then China came on the scene and the jobs moved from Mexico to China.

It also allowed US agribusiness to wipe out small Mexican farmers.

A problem occured when manufacturing operations moved to Mexico. The US executives would issue orders, but the Mexicans who ran the production operations often didn't understand the orders, what with the language problem. The corporations then found that they needed American/Mexican bilinguals to coordinate the Mexican operations with the US operations. Unfortunately, the American/Mexican bilinguals were then able to achive positions of corporate power over those who had kissed ass for a long time.

The power of the American/Mexican bilinguals was intolerable to many who politiced in the large corporations. Thus, operations were moved to China. Of course, the same problenms will occur, but it will take a while before it becomes obvious.

The people who run large corporations are often not very smart. However, they are almost all good ass kissers.

 

[Jagged]

Thanks Pure...another informative topic to discuss

 

[Pure]

the more i think about it

the more i think that the "illegals" problem is very similar to the "hookers" problem:

1) IS there a problem? who says? Well, in our city some neighborhoods WERE overrun with hookers in front of residential houses, fighting at night with pimps, etc. However this problem was partly created by police and citizens-- they were chased off some main roads, and secondly PROSECUTED for working from home! IOW, real problems could be--and have been--ddressed, if there were not other agendas; in the 'hooker' case, palliative solutions involve areas for street hookers or legal working at home.

2) How to solve the problem? Probably it can't be solved since there is always a demand for 'low end' sex services, just as there is for low end--unskilled labor. Further the crack ho gives a bj for 30 dollars and that price can't be beat. The illegal's cleaning your yard for a day, for $20 can't be beat either, not to say, cleaning hotel rooms.

3) Clamp downs are temporary and for show. The authorities, esp at elections have to SEEM to be doing something. Just as congressmen and police enjoy prostitutes services, so do congressmen etc--as in frequently in the news-- actually hire illegals for yard work, nannies, etc.

4) Benefits to a small number, are great. Prostitution pays the directors very well. Further the customers are generally happy.


5) Indirect benefits: wives and girl friends and 'dates' benefit when they wish to refuse sex with no repurcussions. Everyone buying cheap lettuce benefits. Everyone paying 70 dollars instead of 100 dollars per night at a hotel benefits, as do the hotel owners (no 'benefits' to pay for illegal workers).

---

Niether the problem nor alleged 'solutions' are what they appear; while both "problems" can be abated in countries where people become realistic and those benefitting are few [and not in power], they are insoluble in the US at present, same as 'the drug problem.'

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

PURE

No. Most citizens dont want the shit on the streets. Majority rules.

 

[Pure]

wrong. the majority want hookers and illegals, just no 'inconvenience.'

 

[Boxlicker101]

wrong. the majority want hookers and illegals, just no 'inconvenience.'

I might be mistaken, but I believe the majority would not be opposed to the legalization of prostitution, as long is it could be limited to certain areas and otherwise kept under control. I'm not saying they would want it, but they would vote yes if the legalization were ever to be placed on a ballot. The prostitutes themselves, and their johns, would strongly favor it, for a variety of reasons.

However, the opposition is quite strident against it. This wod include pimps, who would lose their power and might have to find honest jobs, crooked cops and judges and politicians, who would lose their bribe money and church people who decry "SINNING!"

In this case, the vocal minority outweighs the silent majority.

Illegal aliens might be a different matter. Millions of young, unattached men with no stake in the society will always cause problems in matters of crime, disease, depressed wages, medical emergencies, and probably other areas. Those who have been in the US for a long time, and have families and hold down decent jobs might be a different matter. Those of my acquaintance might be described in that way. However, even here, most people don't like the idea of rewarding illegal behavior.

There are many who say something like: "My ancestors had to wait and do it legally, and so should they." What they may not understand is that that was then and this is now. Uneducated, unskilled people who try to go through the proper channels have almost no chance of being allowed to immigrate legally.