The New York Times reports on an Alabama town where illegal aliens are getting the hint from the state’s new immigration law and leaving. It’s obviously presented as a terrible thing, but this is exactly the point of such measures — attrition through enforcement. And I wonder if the Times will do a follow-up piece on all the unemployed Americans hired by the chicken plant the illegals used to work at.
No follow up necessary. From the article:
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMr. Orr said there were already signs that the law was working, pointing out that the work-release center in Decatur, about 50 miles to the northwest, was not so long ago unable to find jobs for inmates with poultry processors or home manufacturers. Since the law was enacted in June, he said, the center has been placing more and more inmates in these jobs, now more than 150 a day.
. . . and the increased wages and benefits they must now pay an entirely legal workforce (not native born, but 100% legal).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, and it's likely that most of the $ they earn will be spent and circulated locally, in our country, rather than being sent to Mexico or wherever.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Americans who would take these jobs were getting the money to survive from somewhere. Who do you think was supporting them? The US government, the state government, their families, charities - money much of which is freed for other uses, since they now have jobs.
Granted, most chicken plant workers are probably net tax drains. If illegal immigrants are working in the chicken plants then you have two net tax drains in America: the illegals, and the unemployed Americans who could be working there. Replace the illegal with a citizen and you have one tax drain rather than two. Poor American citizens live here no matter what. They are not optional. Poor illegal immigrants are.
By the way, Alabama has 9.9% unemployment and over 30% of its population is on food stamps. There are plenty of Alabamans available to do these jobs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhile we're asking for follow-ups, the Times should also report the change in the cost structure and prices of chicken to consumers given the rise in costs associated with artificially thinning the labor pool.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSure - if they report the tax savings to Americans from not having to support poor Americans AND poor illegal immigrants with unemployment, public education, food stamps, TANF, etc.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf the price of food goes up, we'll waste less of it. The epidemic of obesity, which is serious by the way, will abate.
Further the employers, faced with increased labor costs will start to find alternatives. Robot chicken processors can't be far off.
Whenever I encounter stories about how local action has encouraged illegals to leave I point out that Massachuessets made it difficult for illegals and many undocumented Brazilians returned home. Guess who's doing their jobs now? I wonder if Obama noticed on his last trip to the vineyard?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo the desire for lower chicken prices justifies the corporate exploitation of illegal immigrants?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseActually, illegal immoigration artificially inflates the labor pool, driving down wages. So, we have been buying artificially inexpensive chicken.
Some also might be leaving because of the tornadoes a couple of months ago. Many chicken farms said that they weren't going to rebuild which will also lower the labor force. This is why it must be hard to be a Democrat lawmaker. The world is dynamic, not static.
My capta, "I'm Blessed"-yes I am. My home wasn't damaged in the storms, I have a 24-yr old daughter, an 8-yr old son and a smokin hot wife :)!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Americans really are going to work at poultry plants and in the fields - good. Time will tell - but so far the only people mentioned taking these jobs are coming from a prison release program.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, offhand, I would say that for the community it's a win win: prisoners get a job (possibly lowering recidivism rates); costs of education & welfare for illegals go down; money gets spent in the community instead of as Wells Fargo remittances.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd the problem with that is... what?
Those people still need jobs too. If they work hard they'll move on to other jobs, if they become a repeat offender they'll go back to jail, and some may keep working there a long time. Either way, there's always going to be new releasees to fill the new openings.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo problem - but there is not a never ending stream of ex-convicts and I am dubious that the long prognosticated inflow of former welfare recipients to these jobs. I am betting that there actually are jobs Americans won't do. But I would pleasantly suprised to be wrong.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRepeat after me: Alabama. 9.9% unemployment. 30% food on stamps.
Say that over and over until you get the idea - there are plenty of people there who can do these jobs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Say that over and over until you get the idea - there are plenty of people there who can do these jobs."
Sure they can do them physically. But there are already many many jobs already available that you and I could find in 5 minutes. Why haven't they sought out those jobs? It's because there is a segment of the population in which it is not a question of being able to do the job - it is a question of someone constantly leading them by the hand. It is a lot easier to receive a welfare check.
Contrast this workforce with illegal aliens who are trying to make a life for their families and the difference in work ethic is night and day. That is why employers like illegal aliens - they have a work ethic.
Markets work efficiently - placing the people best suited for a job in that job. And while it might sound good to tinker in the market - it won't work. There is a reason why the large majority of people who are unemployed are unemployed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThen take away their benefits and let them work or starve. But if we are going to take away their benefits we have to ensure there are jobs available for them to take.
Work ethic? To the extent that illegals have one it is because they aren't eligible for many gov't benefits. The legal children of illegals regress to the mean.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Then take away their benefits and let them work or starve. But if we are going to take away their benefits we have to ensure there are jobs available for them to take."
We don't need return to a state of nature where people 'work or starve.' If people want to live at a basic level of subsistence - let them be! We have the technology and wealth to allow them to do so. People are motivated when they are building wealth - we don't need to motivate people out of fear - that creates a really ugly society.
"Work ethic? To the extent that illegals have one it is because they aren't eligible for many gov't benefits. The legal children of illegals regress to the mean."
The market speaks for itself - people hire illegal immigrants because they have a work ethic. They have put up with all sorts of obstacles to come to this country and build some wealth. Their children regress to the mean - because they become assimilated to American culture.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe argument one hears from the open borders loons - again and again and again - is that Enforcement Proposal X "won't work."
Taking away illegal dirver's licenses "won't work." Taking away their free public education "won't work." Fences "won't work." E-Verify "won't work." Local enforcement "won't work."
And despite the fact that the open borders loons "know" that these enforcement proposals "won't work," they fight them all tooth-and-nail. They don't want them to even be enacted. If they are enacted, they get a judge to overturn them. If they know they won;t work, what are they so afraid of?
Because they know they WILL WORK.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust so I'm clear, many of the same conservatives that recoil at the authoritarianism of mandating the purchase of health insurance revel in the authoritarianism of prohibiting the purchase of migrant labor.
The article clearly establishes the harm: families (usually including at least some US citizens) are disrupted and have to uproot to new areas to avoid the reach of the state. What's not clearly established is why migration is a problem that justifies such dramatic state powers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNL - Just so you're clear:
- The Constitution does not state the federal government can force individuals to line corporations pockets by making citizens buy specific products from certain corporations.
- The Constitution does provide a role for the federal government in enforcing borders, and legally defines who is, and isn't, a US citizen.
I realize complex concepts like "rule of law" are a bit foreign to lefists. But I think I was able to lay it out in a manner my 7-year-old could figure out, just for you. Let me know if I made these concepts easy enough for you to understand.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse