Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

There is an enormous number of Americans who have been harmed by the criminals who pass through the nation's open borders. For that reason, this section can only provide a symbolic tribute to the many unnamed victims who have been killed, raped, rob

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I do not take food off anyone's table. I have NEVER recieved government benefits. I am not a racist. I do not blame my problems on a particular set of people. Doing THAT is racist. I am, for your information, a citizen of this Country. I have been a citizen of this country since birth. I grew up speaking English. Most of my ancestors were Europeans. Does that give me a special right which precedes that of people who's ancestors are from other places? NO How can you blame all the problems of this country on foreigners? Do you know how incredibly naive that is? You obviously aren't starving if you can afford to own a computer and connect several times a day to the internet. Yet you say that immigrants are taking food off your table? It is very difficult for immigrants to receive food stamps unless they receive them for thier US CITIZEN children. Those poor children who are US CITIZENS have just as much a right to food stamps as poor white or African-American children who's parents speak English. Why do those children have less of a right to education than other children? My future children will be the sons and/or daughters of an "illegal" Mexican and a US citizen. Will you argue that they will have no right to go to school with your son either. Will they somehow be less worthy than other children. Give me break!! Stop blaming your problems on others and why don't YOU take a look in the mirror. Do some serious self examination and ask yourself just what you morals are. Are they based on improving yourself or on crying out "injustice" everytime you see someone else doing something that YOU don't like? If you think that you are any better than the people you blame all the problems on, then you are wrong. Stop searching for articles on the internet that condemn and go get to know some of those so called "criminals." You might be surprised to learn that they aren't all the leeches that you claim they are. Get to know them really well and THEN you can decide whether that particular person is ruining this country or not!!!

    Comment


    • #47
      Acelaw,
      I admire your passion and dedication. You are putting a lot of energy into this and is obviously very important for you. Seems like you are very convinced but also full of hate. I wonder what is fueling all this. Why are you so angry? Regardless, I think you present a strong case, but it has fundamental flaw: You are generalizing, presenting lots of one-sided opinions and statistics that are only confusing different issues. You can put statistics together to show any correlation you want, but the truth is, immigration and crime are two different issues. People are people regardles of their color, origin, or legal status: criminals are criminals, educated people the same. They come in all colors and shapes. Some people are called lazy mexicans, others are called white trash. Some kids get high with alcohol, some others with meth or more expensive drugs! Some people are irresponsible some others are extremely hard working. Some very intelligent, some street smart but other not so bright! Again, regardless of their skin! I know very hard-working and admirable people legal and illegal immigrants, residents and US citizens. What about you? who do you know? who is your family? what do you use to get high?

      This is a great country, and as an immigrant, I respect it and admire it tremendously. I know there are huge problems here, but other countries have big ones too. You cannot blame people for wanting to immigrate and seek a better life. Wouldn't you do the same? How many people leave their hometowns looking for better jobs within the US? Is that your case perhaps? But see, that is not the issue. Immigration is one thing, Crime is another. The sad thing is criminals migrate too.
      There is something wrong with your premise:
      Criminals are illegal immigrants, then all illegal immigrants are criminals. Stop immigration and crime will disappear...!???
      What you are proposing is that they kick out all criminals and lazy people of this country. This should include lazy immigrants, white trash, rednecks, rapists and murderers like Kobe Bryant, OJ Simpson, how about that mother that drawned her own kids, or Donna L. Walker. Just go to any news webpage. Should all of them be expelled from this country?)
      Homework for you: what would it happen if the US goverment, the most powerful on earth today, decided to close its borders and within one month deport all immigrants: illegal, out of status or legal residents? Is that doable with today's technology??? I think, yes. In fact, in a heartbeat! Now, how would the economy be affected? In a positive or a negative way?
      Think, who built this country? Who will continue to make it stronger? GET IT? Have you stop and think why they have not done so, if it is such a threat to Homeland security?
      My friend, I dont intend to change your mind, because only something stronger than this posting will. You have to understand you are insulting lots of hard-working inocent people. I will not judge you or the US population based on Timothy McVeigh. So, please don't. Don't generalize.
      What goes around, comes around. A time will come when you find yourself swallowing your own words. Maybe because you or your kids fall in love with an illegal immigrant, or an illegal immigrant saves your life, or takes care of you when you are old.
      I hope some day, the passion moving you today, drives you to resolve real issues. Please keep it up, but use it wisely.

      Comment


      • #48
        The battle cry from those that support this was they are doing the jobs we won't do , red herring, they had to have something to rationalize their bad, immoral , illegal behavior. So if this is the list we won't do and as you stated , lots of folks I know made a living at these jobs, but not anymore, look at the pay table for these jobs the whole list would avg. right at $10 per hour, supply and demand right, have depressed the wages. We all hear about these jobs we wont do but never see them on paper? You don't see construction on that list, where 16% work IN CONSTRUCTION , cutting wages and displacing legal citizens. It sure looks like mass illegal immigration is Fueling this, Employment (thousands of jobs)

        Occupations 2000 2010 Growth

        Food preparation and serving 2,206 2,879 673

        Retail salespersons 4,109 4,619 510

        Cashiers (except gaming) 3,325 3,799 474

        Office clerks (general) 2,705 3,135 430

        Security guards 1,106 1,497 391

        Waiters and waitresses 1,983 2,347 364

        Nursing aides, orderlies, attendants 1,373 1,697 323

        Janitors and cleaners (nonhousehold) 2,348 2,665 317

        Home health aides 615 907 291

        Manual laborers and movers 2,084 2,373 289

        Landscaping and groundskeeping 894 1,154 260

        Personal and home care aides 414 672 258

        Truck drivers and delivery services 1,117 1,331 215

        Manual packers and packagers 1,091 1,300 210

        All jobs requiring short-term training 53,198 60,871 7,673

        Table 1

        America's Growing Demand for Low-Skilled Workers

        Source: U.S. Department of Labor, "Occupational Employment Projections to 2010," Monthly Labor Review,

        November 2001.



        www.cbp.org/press/pr000419.html
        NEW JOBS WILL BE LOW PAYING, LOW-SKILLED
        Job seekers face limited opportunities for adequate wages
        Contact: Jean Ross, 916/444-0500
        FOR RELEASE:
        April 19, 2000
        SACRAMENTO - The California economy is booming and unemployment rates are at their lowest point in decades.(haha) However, according to a new study from the California Budget Project, many of state's new jobs require relatively low levels of education and training and pay low wages, leaving California's job seekers with limited opportunities to earn enough to support a family.
        The new report - Will Work Pay? Job Creation in the New California Economy - notes that among the state's 10 fastest growing jobs in absolute numbers, seven of them pay, on average, less than $11 per hour - or less than $23,000 a year for full-time work. In addition, only one out of 10 of the state's fastest growing jobs that would pay enough to support a two-working-parent family is an entry-level type job

        click on source for full read



        The demise of manufacturing jobs will hurt this country for a long time, look at job growth above, poverty level jobs that are fueled by legal/illegal immigration.

        If you cant get employees to staff your restaurant because you can not afford the wage it takes for an employee to actually live on it., or there is a shortage of people then you won"t build one will you ??? Supply and demand right??? Nearly 30 percent of new job
        will arise in retail trade, primarily in eating and drinking. What do we need with a million more places to eat? Waste of land and resources, Hmmm hey maybe try and rebuild our blue collar industries, NAH, lets just import poverty instead and change the face of this nation for WHAT???.
        . Source: Hispanic Magazine
        45 percent: Portion of Hispanic businesses in the service industry.
        16 percent in construction.
        14 percent in retail trade.
        Remainder in agriculture, finance, manufacturing, transportation and wholesaling.
        Source: 2002 Colorado Hispanic Business Report
        . YOU MIGHT WANT TO READ THIS TWICE SO YOU GET IT. After ten years in the United States, the average amnestied illegal alien had only a 7th grade education and an annual salary of less than $9,000 a year, $500 of which gets sent to his homeland. (Report on the Legalized Alien Population, Immigration and Naturalization Service, M-375, March 1992) The IRCA amnesty has cost us 241 billion and still counting!!!
        Low skilled means low pay, THESE DAYS, add the no education in and you have a permanent or close too, slave labor for his life and probably the next 4 generations. Blue collar jobs are far and few between and they have depressed the wages in those. So we have a growth in the low skilled service sector, if we did not have this mass influx would it be growing like it is, supply and demand plus more customers to feed the monster. Take 8 million people out of that sector and what do you get, reduction in new low skilled positions or the jobs never were their and they are unemployed which is the case now .
        Americas economy was never, ever, based on a totally free market in labor. It was based on a labor market constricted by limited immigration and a small population relative to national resources, and a free market in everything else. This was designed to produce high wages. We have always been an explicitly high-wage nation relative to other societies, and this did not happen by accident. (This is the key story in Pat Buchanans book The Great Betrayal, and he is right about this, even if he is wrong about other things.) Labor is the one and only area in which no rational society should want to construct a free market, because free markets make things cheap, and high wages equal a high standard of living. Before anyone pounces, I realize you have to define this a real, not nominal, wages and that there are all sorts of technicalities to this issue. But the principle is rock-solid. Labor is fundamentally different from all other commodities because its well-being is an end in itself, not a means to other ends. And before anyone pounces again, I am advocating controls on the influx of foreign labor, not unions or limits on which jobs Americans can hold.
        Lie #1: "Immigrants helped sustain our economic boom and are essential to our current and future economic vitality."
        Rebuttal #1: Let's go through some basic economics: immigrants increase aggregate or total GNP because whenever you add a new person to the economy and this person produces goods and services, this constitutes economic activity. But it isn't aggregate GNP that makes ours a prosperous country it's per capita GNP, and these immigrants, who are mostly poor , dilute this statistic. If this were not so, we could increase our GNP by having the entire population of India and China move here. Would this be a good idea? Is India a richer country than Switzerland because it has a larger aggregate GNP, though a smaller per capita one? .OF COURSE NOT

        .

        According to the Census Bureau figures, more than two-thirds of current and future population growth is the result of immigration. Dr. Steven Camarota, Director of Reseach for the Center for Immigration Studies, wrote in a January 2001 paper: "Immigration has become the determinate factor in population growth. The 11.2 million immigrants who indicated they arrived between 1990 and 2000 plus the 6.4 million children born to immigrants in the United States during the 1990s are equal to almost 70 percent of U.S. population growth over the last 10 years."

        Reducing immigration therefore is necessary to curb population growth. How many more restaurants, malls , houses , burger joints do we need if we go back to 1965 immigration levels which were targeted for replacement level. The new lenience helps explain why overall wage increases have been less than many economists and policy makers had expected, given an unemployment rate of only 4 percent and a strong demand for people to fill jobs that pay $8 an hour or less, which is 25 percent of all jobs. The Washington Post reported (12/1/02) that half of new workers in the decade of the 1990s were immigrants. This figure is stunning when considered with the new immigrants share of labor force growth in previous decades, i.e., 27 percent in the 1980s and 10 percent in the 1970s. American workers are not unaware of the problem: a pre-911 Zogby poll found that 60 percent of Democratic union households believed that amnesty for illegal aliens was a bad idea. A company is only as good as its weakest employee, throwing cheap labor around will stifle implementing technology, bad in the long run for this country. Companies that need high skilled will leave such as they are doing in Calif, if they don't they will have to shoulder more of the tax burden, not , they pack for greener pastures., Calif. Will implode on itself for this very reason.
        San Francisco Chronicle
        High taxes and lots of rules prompt some firms to leave Calif.
        California is known for exporting computers and chemicals, wine and apparel -- and, of course, cheese. But now the state is gaining the unfortunate reputation for exporting something far more valuable: Jobs. Corporate leaders and some economists fear that California's health is in jeopardy...


        Associated Press--Dallas Morning News, February 11, 2003
        8."Business people in Illinois who will be honest with you will tell you that these [illegal] Mexicans are indispensable," Illinois' senior senator, **** Durbin, said during a visit to Mexico last month. "A major restaurateur in Chicago said to me that 'If you take the Mexicans out of the restaurants, we will close, and the same is true of the hotel industry.'"

        Amazing we were able to make it 200 years with out mass illegal immigration.


        African-Americans being hurt most by joblessness
        The employment picture is bleak. Nationwide, nearly 2.6 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since July 2000. -- And that statistic has hit black Americans hard. --- "Blacks basically command more labor market power, whereas Latinos cannot because of their immigration status," says Dr. Raul Hinojosa, a professor at UCLA. "Therefore, the wage pressure is kept down on Latinos making them more exploitable, and, therefore, more employable. There is really no subtle way to explain the point." 
        How many people can the world support? What causes environmental damage? Not surprisingly, it's too many people using too much energy and resources. So, questions like "how many people can the Earth support?" have intrigued thinkers for centuries.

        Different people have different value systems, hence this question has no right or wrong answer. For example, a person might believe that a world with lots of people whose average standard of living is low is preferable to one that contains fewer people but whose average standard of living is high. Or vice versa.

        There is also the question of what one means by a high standard of living because, for many, this involves more than material goods. For example, for some, a simple life in the country with one car and lots of open space is a much higher standard of living than existence in a densely packed city no matter how much material wealth one might possess. So perhaps "quality of life" is a more appropriate guideline than "standard of living."

        Finally, when asking how many people the Earth or the USA can support, one should also consider other creatures. Some people believe that plant and animal species have as much right to be here as humans and would set aside huge tracts of land to preserve regions like rainforests and wilderness. Others care little about other species and would be content, more or less, with a world that contained no wild nature but lots of humans along with their pets, commercial plants, and livestock.

        At the present time, humans use about 40% of the solar energy captured by the biosphere (Tolba, M. K. 1995, Ambio Vol. 24 #1, p.66; Maurer, B. A. 1996, Biodiversity Letters Vol. 3, p.1). Should this usage exceed 80%, then the loss of biodiversity is likely to be catastrophic (Maurer 1996) and, effectively, the world will be devoted to humans and the plants and animals we cultivate. Biologists generally agree that, if people continue with business as usual, then this will be the world of the 22nd Century and, since extinction is forever, ever after.

        Maintaining biodiversity has multiple values. First, as the dominant species on the planet, many people feel that we have an obligation to steward and safeguard other species. Second, many direct economic and other benefits accrue to us from non-human species. And third, other species provide ecosystem services without which human survival is not possible. These services include maintenance of the gaseous composition of the atmosphere, regulation of the hydrological cycle, pollination of crops, control of the vast majority of pests, and the generation and maintenance of fertile soils.

        The Concept of Carrying Capacity

        When flying over the USA we cannot help but notice all of the "wide open spaces." Surely plenty of land is still available for many more Americans, yes? Problem is, there are reasons that these acres appear empty. Many are devoted to producing food or other materials we need to live. The average American has an "ecological footprint" of about 12 acres of typical land. These acres supply a person with food, fiber and other resources as well as capacity for waste assimilation and disposal. So the many of us who are jammed into cities are already using much of the "empty" land.

        Some land is empty because it has no carrying capacity. One obvious example is the continent of Antarctica; lots of land but no capacity to support human life. The Sahara desert is another example. And there are deserts and mountain ranges in the USA that contain few people because, without the expenditure of huge amounts of money, these places cannot sustain human life.

        The Politics of Population

        Opinion polls consistently indicate that about 3/4 of Americans consider themselves environmentalists or at least profess to be concerned about the environment. Similarly, polls show that about 3/4 of Americans think there is too much immigration into the USA. So, there must be a very large overlap between these two groups and, thus, we might expect that many Americans sense that their environment is adversely impacted by massive immigration.

        The two major parties have chosen to ignore rapid, immigration-driven, U.S. population growth, in particular, its environmental implications. Working hand in glove with the politicians are the media. In "How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection," T. Michael Maher discusses how a "spiral of silence about population growth may be maintained by determined pronatalists, immigration advocates, and intimidated journalists." (This excellent study was published in the journal "Population and Environment," Vol. 18, March 1997, pp. 339-372.)

        The links between population growth and environmental degradation, a few of which are mentioned below, simply never appear when journalists write about the environment. And unfortunately most people are either not smart enough or are insufficiently educated to see the connections without some help.

        Since most Americans want cuts in immigration levels, why do they consistently elect politicians who support current levels? The problem is that, for most voters, immigration is not at the top of their list of concerns which might be headed by the economy, crime and education, for example. Therefore, the typical person will not be much concerned about immigration when (s)he goes to vote.

        The Population-Environment Connection

        Parts of the USA are already remarkably densely populated. For example, California, which was effectively empty 100 years ago, is now more densely populated (has more people per square mile) than does the continent of Europe. And, according to recent U.S. Census Bureau estimates, sometime around the year 2030, the population density in California will equal that in China now! This is the same China that has instituted a one child per family policy. California's population growth is essentially due entirely to immigration from abroad.

        Whether it is air pollution in the cities or sprawl in the suburbs, farmland conversion in the valleys or deforestation in the mountains, Americans are destroying the natural systems that keep us alive physically and spiritually. Each year we pave over an area about equal to the state of Delaware for more roads, housing developments, shopping malls and industry. For most resources including energy, per capita U.S. consumption has stabilized, but overall use is increasing, driven higher by continuing growth of the U.S. population.

        An example of this phenomenon is U.S. beef consumption. "Running" cattle often comes with a high environmental price: displacement and murder of native wildlife, stream and soil erosion, desertification, etc. This is true both here in the U.S. or elsewhere, wherever U.S. beef comes from. Since 1970, per capita U.S. beef consumption has declined by about 15%. But, over the same period, U.S. population increased by about 1/3. So people living in the USA now eat substantially more beef, in total, than they did in 1970. (Meat production uses 37% of the world's grain output, but only 5% of Americans are vegetarians.)

        At the same time that total meat consumption is going up, the National Marine Fisheries Service is cutting allowable catches because of perceived sharp declines in numbers of fish. Many fishes have been "harvested" to near commercial extinction both in U.S. waters and worldwide.

        According to the Nature Conservancy, 1/3 of U.S. plant and animal species are already at risk of extinction. Causes of this biological devastation are many, but they all come back, more or less, to humans expropriating habitats of other species for our use. And the more of us there are, the more we must expropriate. According to a report published in 1997 in "Science" (vol. 277, p. 1116) the leading causes of species endangerment are: urbanization; agriculture; outdoor recreation and tourism development; interactions with non-native species; domestic livestock and ranching activities; reservoirs and other running water diversions; pollution; mineral, gas, oil, and geothermal extraction or exploration; and on and on.

        Water scarcity is a problem that many, particularly those who live in the Southwest, can relate to. But scarcity is turning up all over America, even in places as wet as Long Island, New York and South Florida. In Florida, the toxic pollution generated by the dense population is permanently destroying underground aquifers, rivers and wetlands. Sixty-five percent of the 3900 square miles of the Everglades have been drained or diverted to agricultural centers and urban areas such as Miami. So, the Everglades has lost 93% of its wading bird population since the 1930s, while the human population has grown at a rate 2.5 times faster than the national average.

        Nationwide, ground water aquifers are being depleted 25% faster than they are recharged. Of our original 221 million acres of wetlands, only 103 million remain. And despite the federal government's official no-net-loss of wetlands policy, a 1997 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report indicated that about 1 million wetland acres were lost, mostly on agricultural lands, between 1985 and 1995.

        Although we are focusing on the U.S. environment, destruction of the natural world to satisfy our needs is enormous elsewhere too. According to a report in the January 1998 newsletter of the Environmental Defense Fund, "the U.S. is the #1 importer of mahogany, the product most responsible for Amazon deforestation." And half of our imported plywood results from destruction of Indonesia's rain forests. Our appetite for wood and minerals motivates the road builders who open tropical rain forests to poor settlers, resulting in the slash-and-burn forest clearing that is condemning countless species to extinction. Further growth of the U.S. population will only increase these demands.

        Isn't Overconsumption the Real Culprit?

        Some would say that the real problem is high U.S. consumption rather than population (even though we are now the third most populous country after China and India). And truly, although U.S. per capita consumption is now roughly stabilized, still we should try hard to lower it. Unfortunately, because high consumption is an integral part of our culture, diminishing it significantly will be a slow and difficult process.

        Those few environmentally positive actions we take, such as recycling, are much more than offset by our dreams of a big energy-inefficient home in the suburbs. Fulfillment of this dream accelerates destruction of farmland and increases automobile usage, not to mention all of the materials involved. In 1998 gas prices tumbled as more and more people purchased gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, hardly the way to cut consumption.

        Most of the 75% of Americans who profess to be concerned about the environment are, more or less, heavily invested in the soaring stock market. But these companies are often the very ones that most despoil the environment. Many of them are multinational in nature and their tentacles (our tentacles) extend to sensitive lands abroad; half of the world's industrial output is generated by multinational corporations. Similar considerations apply to banks in which we have savings deposits.

        Even with the best of intentions, because of inertia built into the infrastructure of our country, meaningful change in overall consumption will take a long time. An example from Los Angeles illustrates the problem. In 1997 a group of environmentalists welcomed the new head of the L.A. Dept. of Water and Power, a man with demonstrated concern for the environment. His vision is to power L.A. with renewable energy, specifically solar power. His first step is to equip 100,000 houses. But when asked, thinking optimistically, how long this might take, his response was, "about 25 years." So, even when we have a government official with special sympathies for the environment, it still will take, optimistically, 25 years to switch a tiny fraction of the homes in L.A. to solar power. And most government and private leadership is not so motivated.

        If the U.S. continues to accept current levels of legal and illegal immigrants, then the U.S. population could double in 80 years. Because of considerations outlined in the previous two paragraphs, the time required to halve our per capita energy consumption is unlikely to be less than 80 years. Thus, in the absence of better immigration laws, we can be pretty sure that the total U.S. ecological footprint will not be smaller in the year 2100 than it is in 2000 and it might be much bigger.

        Conclusion
        The unforgivable thing is that we know all of the above. But we refuse to do anything about it, falling back on our old faith in a limitless continent and open frontiers that will last forever. A huge unfilled political econiche awaits anyone with the courage to say enough is enough.



        Sprawl Facts
        To feed our growing population California is losing over 100,000 acres of farmland annually to urban sprawl. (American Farmland Trust)

        The U.S. area devoted to roads and parking lots covers an estimated 61,000 square miles, an expanse approaching the size of the 51.9 million acres that U.S. farmers planted in wheat last year. (Lester Brown, "They Paved Pears and Rice and Put Up a Parking Lot," Grist Magazine)

        See why protecting our farmland is important by viewing The Apple as Planet Earth.

        The United States, not including Alaska, lost 24.8 million acres to development from 1982 to 1997. (1997 National Resources Inventory, U.S. Department of Agriculture)

        Between 1954 and 1997, urbanized land area almost quadrupled from 18.6 million acres to about 74 million acres in the contiguous 48 states. The consequences of this land consumption include habitat loss and fragmentation, wetland destruction, and degradation of water quality. (US EPA)

        As more land is urbanized, more surface area becomes impervious"”affecting ground water recharge and the volume and rate of surface water runoff. Urban runoff is responsible for 55% of environmentally impaired ocean shorelines; 46% of impaired estuary miles; and 21% of impaired lake-miles, according to the 1996 EPA National Water Quality Inventory. (US EPA)

        Between 1980 and 1997, US population growth increased at an annual rate of 1%, while miles driven increased 3.1% annually. In turn, this auto-dependence leads to more and longer vehicle trips, which are associated with the auto-related air emissions and greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change. Ultimately, air pollution and climate change can also adversely affect water quality and habitat. (US EPA)

        Natural Resources Facts
        The use of fresh water will go up sixfold in the next 70 years and by 2050 half of the world's population will be living without direct access to fresh water. (UNFPA State of the World Population 2001 Report)

        More than 100 million Americans live in urban areas where the air is officially classified by the EPA as unsafe to breathe. (Natural Resources Defense Council)

        Twenty percent more water than is now available will be needed to feed the additional three billion people who will be alive by 2025. (World Commission on Water for the 21st Century)

        The world is in the midst of a mass extinction unlike any since the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Extinction rates are currently estimated anywhere between 100 to 1,000 times greater than normal. (National Wildlife Federation)

        For every single gallon of gasoline burned, 20 pounds of carbon dioxide go into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is considered a main culprit in global warming. (Union of Concerned Scientists)

        At current rates of use, the non-renewable energy sources, oil, and natural gas will be commercially exhausted by about 2050 in the United States (Carrying Capacity Network)

        Each year, Americans pave over or convert to developed uses an area of land equal to the size of Delaware.(Carrying Capacity Network)

        If current population growth trends continue, the USA will cease to be able to export food by about the year 2030, thus losing approximately 40 billion annual income from export sales. (Carrying Capacity Network)

        Between 50% and 70% of the world's population lives in coastal areas. If current warming rates continue, thermal expansion of the oceans and melting of polar ice caps will cause sea levels to rise. Increased flooding from higher tides and stronger storm systems could destroy coastal farmland, habitats and wildlife populations. (NOAA 1999)

        Experts estimate that 75% of the total decline in global forest cover took place during the 20th century, with most occurring in just the last 40 years. Within this same period, the human population has expanded at a rate never before experienced in our history. (Population Action International, 1999)

        Only about 2.5% of all water on the planet is freshwater (essential for most human purposes) and only about 0.5% is accessible groundwater or surface water. (UNFPA)


        Consumption Facts
        Calculate your Ecological Footprint

        If the entire world consumed resources at the average consumption level of a citizen of the U.S., we would need 4 Earths to support us all! (U.S. Department of Energy 2001)

        One child in the United States impacts the environment as much as 280 children in Haiti. (US EPA)

        Without intervention, researchers say increases in farm production to feed a burgeoning population over the next half century will pollute, destroy forests and kill off animal species.

        If present consumption patterns continue, two out of every three persons on Earth will live in water-stressed conditions by the year 2025. (WMO, 1997)

        The US has 5% of the world's population, yet we consume over 25% of the world's resources. (US EPA, 2000)

        With less than 5% of the world's population, the U.S. emits more than 20% of the world's greenhouse gases. (US Department of Energy, 2001)


        Additional Resources

        PPIC Statewide Survey: Special Survey on Californians and the Environment
        By Mark Baldassare, June 2002

        Conservation, Population And Environmental Voting Records of the California
        Congressional Delegation
        By Stuart H. Hurlbert and Joan S. Dainer, 2002

        Forsaking Fundamentals: The Environmental Establishment Abandons U.S.
        Population Stabilization
        By Leon Kolankiewicz and Roy Beck, 2000

        Sprawl in California: A Report on Quantifying the Role of the State's Population Boom
        By Roy Beck and Leon Kolankiewicz
        The dramatic results of this report indicate that population growth has been
        the No. 1 factor in California's relentless urban sprawl. Overall, 95% of the
        total sprawl in California from 1970-1990 was related to population growth indicating that most Urbanized Areas in California succeed in stopping
        increases in per capita land consumption. Yet despite efforts to stop per
        capita land consumption, sprawl consumed another 1,670 square miles of
        land during the period studied, primarily because of population growth.
        "Sprawl in California" was presented at the CAPS 2000 Conference at the University of Southern California on August 13, 2000.

        Comment


        • #49
          Foreign workers costing U.S. jobs?
          Import of cheap labor by corporations seen driving wages down
          By Jon Dougherty

          WorldNetDaily
          http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=33861
          August 1, 2003

          Corporations allowed to import large numbers of lesser-paid foreign workers to fill jobs in the United States, coupled with numerous "free trade" agreements, have caused depressed wages and unemployment for American workers, say economists and experts.

          Worse, they say, some firms are set to import even more foreign workers, despite current unemployment levels standing at their highest in years.

          According to Eagle Forum founder, syndicated columnist and author Phyllis Schlafly, the "scandal" of the H-1B and L-1 visa programs "is why this year's college graduates face the worst job market in recent memory."

          "The big argument for the tax cut [recently] signed by President Bush is that it will create much-needed jobs," she writes in the June issue of "The Phyllis Schlafly Report," her organization's monthly newsletter. "But one big question remains: Will those jobs be created for Americans, or will corporations simply hire more job-seekers from India and China?"

          The visa programs, authorized in the 1990 Immigration Act, "allow corporations to import up to 65,000 cheap skilled workers from foreign countries to fill alleged labor shortages," said Schlafly. The common claim of a labor shortage advanced by some corporations, she said, "was always a fiction and now is nonsense."

          In June, unemployment rose to 6.4 percent, up from 6.1 percent in May, representing 9.4 million jobless Americans, the Labor Department reported. Though the department said new claims for unemployment fell last week to 388,000 - the third week in a row new jobless claims have dropped off - a separate report said U.S. corporations are reporting cheaper labor costs.

          "U.S. employers incurred a much smaller increase in the cost of hiring and retaining workers during the second quarter of 2003 than they did in the previous three months," said the Dow Jones news service, rising only 0.9 percent from April to June. "The cost of wages and salaries grew even more slowly, rising just 0.6 percent."

          Schlafly, in her report, says some U.S. job sectors are being hit harder than others, resulting in unemployment rates surpassing the national level.

          Citing U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, Schlafly wrote: "Unemployment among American electronic engineers has soared to 7 percent, and among computer hardware engineers to 6.5 percent."

          "Despite hundreds of thousands of unemployed American engineers and computer specialists, corporations continue to import foreigners at the same time Å  they lay off U.S. citizens," said the report.

          Recently completed free-trade deals also have some lawmakers and economists concerned about the future of American workers and wages they are paid.

          Writing in the Chicago Sun-Times, Thomas Roeser, quoting banker and manufacturer John E. Jones, is critical of free-trade policies because, he claims, they have depressed American wages for 30 years.

          "Jones says one reason is that 'free trade economists preach that whatever produces the lowest possible cost is best. All things being equal, everyone would agree that this is true. But if you need not consider anything but cost, a slave economy is better because it is lower cost,'" Roeser writes.


          According to Roeser, Jones says "real wages" for Americans peaked in 1973, ''shortly after the U.S. became an unprotected economy in 1971," when they were 176 percent of what real wages were in 1946. Jones also says real wages have fallen to just 92 percent of what they were in the mid-1940s.

          Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reported in July illegal immigration was "undermining American workers" and pulling down wages while pushing taxes higher, especially in California - now saddled with a $38 billion budget deficit.

          Also, immigration-reform group Project USA criticized Bush administration trade policy last week as further endangering American workers.

          "The Chile/Singapore free-trade agreements will allow 'American' corporations to move an unlimited number of 'employees' from those countries to ours," the group said, in a statement. "In other words, multinational corporations not the American people will dictate the number of foreigners allowed into the United States."

          The Federation for American Immigration Reform, another group opposed to unrestricted immigration, also criticized the trade agreements as detrimental to U.S. workers.

          Said FAIR, "making these provisions especially dangerous, the Bush administration is touting them as a model to be replicated in future trade agreements with numerous other countries."

          Longtime critic of corporate work-visa abuse Rob Sanchez, writing in May 2002, said, "These trade bills are unique from other types of immigration laws in one major way: They cannot be repealed by Congress without the consent of the country the agreement was made with.

          "Once these agreements are passed, American workers will be powerless to stop the flood of workers that will arrive to compete with them in the job market," Sanchez said.

          On his website, Sanchez says over 17 million visas to allow foreigners to work in the U.S. have been issued since 1985. "By the end of the year 2001, more than 890,000 H-1B workers were employed in the United States," he said.

          "With 18 million Americans struggling to find full-time employment, the Bush administration has no business making agreements with foreign nations to flood the labor market with an unlimited amount of imported labor," added ProjectUSA.

          Schlafly believes Americans were duped into accepting the loss of millions of jobs, mostly in the manufacturing sector.

          "When U.S. corporations built hundreds of plants in Third World countries, we were told not to worry because we were keeping the service jobs," she writes. "Now the high-paying white-collar service jobs are going overseas, too, particularly jobs for engineers and computer specialists."

          "Follow the money," says Schlafly. "The big corporations hire aliens from India and China at half or a third the [U.S.] wages, work them long hours without overtime pay and treat them like indentured servants unable to quit for a better job.

          "What makes this racket possible is the partnership between corporations and government," she said.

          Comment


          • #50
            Acelaw, I have been reading your posts with much amusement. I have been trying to figure out what your deal is and think I have it. You are either an immigrant yourself or just uneducated. Once you get away from cutting and pasting your articles into your posts, your command of written english falls off. Perhaps you are an immigrant who needs more practice and education in written english. If this is the case, I am glad that this forum gives you that redress. The other possiblity is that you are just an uneducated ****, who blames everyone else for your inability to lead a productive life here in the United States.

            I will let you get back to your cutting and pasting.

            Comment


            • #51
              Ya your on to me MORON

              IMMIGRATION STATISTICS


              POPULATION
              * The United States receives more immigrants every year than the rest of the world combined.
              * 33.1 million legal and illegal immigrants living in the United States, accounting for 11.5% of the population, the highest percentage in 70 years.
              * The number of illegal aliens in this country is between 8 million to 12 million. .
              * The nation's unemployment rate climbed to a nine-year high of 6.1 percent in May, 2003. The number of people who cannot find full time jobs in America is 8.8 million plus an additional 4.4 million Americans who have dropped out of the labor force.
              * The number of employed [illegal aliens], particularly Mexicans, rose by 600,000 in the two years ended December, 2002.
              * North Carolina has the fastest growing "Hispanic" population of any state in the U.S. North Carolina gained more Hispanics from California than from any other state, and two-thirds of the adults among the Hispanics moving from California to North Carolina did not have a high school education.
              * Immigration (legal and illegal) accounts for almost 80% of the U.S. population growth in the last decade
              * Illegal aliens adjusting status under 245(i) accounted for 32 percent of all "green cards" awarded in 2002
              * Over 1.3 million new legal immigrants and over 1.5 million ILLEGAL aliens come to the U.S. every year. Over the first century of U.S. history, we received about two legal immigrants a day. Today, we receive over two legal immigrants every MINUTE. That's 3,500 per day, 150 per hour.
              * Approximately 1.4 million ILLEGAL aliens come here EVERY year. Roughly half of those stay. That's also two per minute.
              * If immigration continues at the current rate, the current U.S. population of 285 million will rise to 400 million in 50 years.
              * Since 1986, Congress has passed 7 amnesties for illegal aliens.
              * When the nation tried amnesty in 1986, the idea was to combine it with a crackdown on hiring illegal workers. The amnesty worked for 2.8 million migrants, but the crackdown did not. Nothing is more permanent than temporary worker amnesty.
              * Unmarried Hispanic women aged 15-44 are more than three times likely as an unmarried white women to have to have an Illegitimate child .

              COSTS
              * The net cost of immigration is $70 billion a year.
              * The annual net cost of illegal immigrants is estimated at $20 billion.
              * Immigration costs U.S. born workers $133 billion a year in job losses.
              * Illegal aliens displace 730,000 American workers every year at an annual cost of $4.28 billion. More than half of new workers in the decade of the 1990s were immigrants.
              * Mexicans sent $10.5 billion in remittances to Mexico in 2002. Remittances to Mexico are the second highest source of income, exceeding tourism, and only lagging behind oil revenues.
              * Foreign workers in the United States sent $25 billion to Latin America and the Caribbean in 2002, followed by $16 billion sent to South Asia. Mexico was the world's second largest recipient of remittances after India with $10.5 billion. $5.5 billion to Central American nations, $5.45 billion to the Caribbean, and $5.4 billion to the Andean region. Filipino workers send $6 billion a year.
              * Mexicans living in the United States sent $6.1 billion home to relatives in the first half of this year, up 29 percent from the first six months of 2002
              * The lifetime net fiscal drain - taxes paid minus all services used - for the average adult immigrant is $55,200.
              * The 1986 amnesty program cost $78 billion to American citizens in services and benefits, about $26,000 per legalized immigrant.
              * The U.S. unemployment rate rose in June from 6.1 percent to 6.4 percent. North Carolina had the ninth-highest rate in the nation and tied with South Carolina for the third-highest in the Southeast, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
              * Bilingual education for legal and illegal immigrants costs U.S. taxpayers over $8 billion annually.
              * Medical care for illegal aliens, required under the "Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act," which prohibits emergency rooms from turning any patient away in need of emergency care, costs American taxpayers $3.7 billion in Medicare and Medicaid funds. These services are NOT available to American citizens.
              * Immigrants are 50% more likely to get welfare than natives - with a full 75% being more likely to get food stamps, medical benefits and housing assistance. Non-citizens now collect nearly $7 BILLION a year in benefits.
              * Durham (NC) Public Health Department estimates that half of the department's clients speak Spanish. In certain clinics, such as the Obstetrics and Gynecology clinic at Lincoln Community Health Center, the percentages are even higher.
              * Nearly 1/3 of Hispanics receive benefits, compared to less than a tenth of non-Hispanic whites.
              * The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services was $435 billion in 2002, a 21 percent jump from $358 billion in 2001.
              * The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services is now running at an annual rate of $562 billion in 2003
              * Immigration accounts for most of the increase in public school enrollment for the last 20 years. The average cost per student per year is $6,189. In addition, the average cost of bilingual education is about $1,200 per student. Immigration costs U.S. taxpayers $24 billion in education expenses.
              * The tenth richest country in the world is Mexico. Mexico is fourth in the world with the number of billionaires.
              * Mexico is the fifth-leading exporter of oil in the world. It also has twice the oil reserves of the United States. Mexico is also the world's leading exporter of silver (about 15% of the world's production),.
              * Since 1993, textile mills have shed one of every two jobs statewide, or 83,000. Of those, 36,000 were eliminated in just the past three years , according to the N.C. Employment Security Commission.
              * An estimated half to a third of illegal aliens work off the books and pay no income tax. Those who do tend to earn very low incomes, and therefore pay little tax. Nationwide, the International Monetary Fund reports that underground work amounted to 10% of the total U.S. economy.
              * Half a million IT jobs - roughly 1 in 20 - will go abroad in the next 18 months.
              * Nearly 5 percent of human- resources jobs have moved offshore in the past year, and by 2007 that number will climb to at least 15 percent.
              * By 2015, 3.3 million US high-tech and service-industry jobs will be overseas. That's 2 percent of the entire workforce, and $136 billion in US wages.
              * The U.S. with its population of 289 million only has 14,727,000 manufacturing jobs left. If the US continues to lose manufacturing jobs at the same rate over the next 28 months, only 12.7 million jobs will be left.
              * The National Council of La Raza (The Race) has an annual operating budget of $30 million. In 2003, in addition to a $3.6 million commitment from Bank of America, NCLR received $5 million commitments from both the PepsiCo Foundation and State Farm Insurance Companies, a $2.5 million commitment from General Motors Company, and $1 million commitments from Fannie Mae, UPS, Univision, and the PMI Group.

              CRIME
              * 75% of all illegal drugs in the United States today come across the Mexico border.
              * Two-thirds of the cocaine comes over the U.S.- Mexico border.
              * 50% of all heroin available in the U.S. comes over the Mexican border
              * Mexico supplies as much as 95 percent of the marijuana consumed in the U.S. market.
              * From the 1930s to the 1960s, 90% of the methamphetamine manufactured in this country is manufactured by Mexican national (non-U.S citizen) drug organizations.
              * Every year, $200 Billion a year of smuggled drugs. $500 million a year goes to Mexican generals and police in bribes.
              * Human smuggling grossed $9.5 billion in 2002, according to U.S. immigration officials.
              * In 2002, smugglers moved an estimated 1 million [illegal aliens] undocumented foreigners from nearly 100 countries into the United States through Mexico, U.S. and Mexican authorities say.
              * Drinking alcohol starts early for male Hispanics -- as early as age 12.
              * Among DUI offenders, rates of alcohol and drug dependence are much higher among Whites and Mexican Americans born in the United States as compared to Mexican Americans born in Mexico
              * Hispanics are overrepresented among DUI arrestees. There are 360 arrests per drinking driver in fatal crashes among Hispanics compared to 205 arrests per drinking driver in fatal crashes for Caucasians
              * Hispanics comprised 9 percent of the driving population, but 21 percent of those arrested for impaired-driving nationally were Hispanic.
              * The number of hit-and-run accidents has risen dramatically in California -- a greater percentage of drivers flee the scenes of fatal crashes here than in any other state in the nation. The figure is more than twice the national average of 3.8 percent - - and a full percentage point higher than the next-highest state, Arizona [which also has a very high number of illegal aliens].
              * The California Department of Motor Vehicles estimates that there are 1 million unlicensed drivers.
              * Dana Pevia was kidnapped from her North Carolina school bus stop in 1999 when she was only 11. In March, 2003, she was able to escape her captivity in Mexico and visit the American Consulate in Guadalahara. Dana returned home a few days later with her two children. The kidnapper Hector Frausto, a "Mexican construction worker," was arrested in North Carolina on March 27, 2003. Dana was evidently forcibly kept captive by his family in Mexico for much of that time. She was only able to escape because of the help of a sympathetic neighbor.
              * Over 25% of the prisoners in federal prisons are illegal aliens.
              * Over one in every hundred adult male Hispanics (1.2%) was imprisoned in 2001 - almost a third of the non-Hispanic black rate (3.5%) and over twice the non-Hispanic white rate (0.5%).
              * The criminal alien prison population cost taxpayers about $900 million annually.
              * America's 1950's "Operation Wetback" deported over a million illegal Mexican laborers from Texas. That was because the illegal Mexicans disrupted the agricultural economy, and brought crime, disease, and illiteracy to America.
              * Mexican Interior Secretary Santiago Creel, who has been agitating for the United States to grant amnesty to Mexican illegal aliens, said July 28, 2003 that his country will never help the United States secure its southern border.
              * Twenty cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago, Miami, Denver, Seattle and Portland, Maine, have adopted "sanctuary" ordinances banning police from asking people about their immigration status.

              DISEASE
              * Hispanic death rate from HIV disease is 2.5-times that of whites and about one-third the black rate.
              * Tuberculosis infects 8 million people a year worldwide, killing 2 million. Increasingly, the problem is settling in the United States, and in North Carolina.
              * The number of tuberculosis cases rose in North Carolina last year, and Wake County had one of the sharpest increases in the state. North Carolina had 436 cases last year, compared with 397 in 2001. More than half of Wake County's 57 cases last year affected immigrants, primarily people from Vietnam, Africa and Mexico. Across the state, the number of foreign-born patients has almost doubled in five years. About a third of new TB cases are among immigrants who contracted TB in their homelands
              * We have 16,000 new cases of tuberculosis and 7,000 new cases of leprosy in the U.S. in the past three years.
              * Immigrants account for over 65% of communicable diseases. Tuberculosis, rubella, leprosy, chickenpox, malaria, dengue fever, west nile virus, hepatitis, lice are the result of uncontolled legal and illegal immigration.
              * The U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition estimates that emergency medical treatment for illegal aliens in the year 2000 was over $200 million for 77 border-area hospitals in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. The costs are nearly a billion dollars when other states are factored in.
              * The costs of illegal alien health care are crippling hospitals across the country. In North Carolina, where Santillan's family has settled, a Medicaid emergency services program averages 221 new cases every month involving immigrants, many of them illegal, at a cost of about $32 million. As the Washington Times reported recently, dozens of hospitals in the 28 counties along the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California have either closed their doors or face bankruptcy because of losses caused by uncompensated care given to illegal immigrants.



              --

              Comment


              • #52
                http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...1/bsgangra.htm
                August 01, 2003

                Gang members held in rape of runaways

                By Bianca Sausa
                Times Herald-Record
                bsausa@th-record.com

                Newburgh Five men were charged this week with raping two runaway teen girls, Newburgh police said last night. Four of the five, police said, are members of the Benkard Barrios Kings gang.
                Detective Lt. Santo Centamore said the girls, ages 14 and 15, were runaways from a juvenile facility in the area and were lured into the second-floor apartment at 70 Hasbrouck St. on July 19 with the prospect of alcohol and marijuana.
                The girls were held down and raped by at least six men, police said.
                The girls reported the rape July 25. After being in hiding for six days, the girls returned home and told one of their mothers, Centamore said. The mother contacted police.
                On Sunday, Newburgh detectives executed a search warrant at the 70 Hasbrouck St. apartment, where, they said, they found some cocaine on the living room floor and arrested five people who were either living there or had been staying there for the night.
                Two of those people, Alberto Bonilla, 21, of 70 Hasbrouck St., and Humberto Luna, 18, were identified as suspects in the rape. Centamore said Luna was arrested after being found to have false immigration and Social Security documents.
                The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service placed immigration holds on Bonilla and Luna as well as two others. They were found to be illegal immigrants from Honduras, police said.
                Further investigation led police to arrest Johnny Banegas, 23, Gabriel Garcia, 24, and Kevin Lopez, 21, all of Newburgh, who were also illegal immigrants from Honduras, Centamore said.
                The men were all charged with two counts of first-degree rape, a felony.
                Luna, Bonilla, Banegas and Garcia were identified as known members of the BBK either through the Newburgh City Police Gang Unit or by identifying tattoos, Centamore said.
                The house at 70 Hasbrouck St. is blue and has two apartments inside. It sits directly across the street from a house spray-painted with BBK graffiti.
                The second-floor apartment is a known hangout for members of the BBK, Centamore said.
                The five men arrested are being held in Orange County Jail on the rape charge and INS detainers.
                The investigation is continuing.
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                Feds arrest 63 in border drug sweep
                Cartel kingpin eludes 'Operation Trifecta'
                Carlos Miller

                The Arizona Republic
                http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...1busted01.html
                Aug. 1, 2003

                Federal agents delivered a major blow to a Mexican drug cartel responsible for smuggling tons of cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine into the United States through Arizona.

                The 19-month investigation, called Operation Trifecta because it involves the cooperation of the United States, Mexico and Colombia, so far has led to the arrests of 240 people.

                On Thursday, authorities arrested 10 people in southern Arizona and 53 others throughout the country, including in Miami, New York and Los Angeles. Mexican authorities arrested an additional four people.

                However, the drug kingpin who heads the cartel, Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada-Garcia, is still at large, believed to be hiding in Mexico.

                "The scope of Zambada-Garcia in Mexico is legendary and spans nearly 30 years," said Special Agent Ramona Sanchez, a public information agent for the federal Drug Enforcement Administration in Phoenix.

                Zambada-Garcia, 55, of Sinaloa, Mexico, is responsible for smuggling tons of drugs into the United States by various methods, including airplanes, trucks and underground tunnels along the Southwestern border, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said during a press conference Thursday in Washington, D.C.
                Zambada-Garcia recently emerged as one of the top drug smugglers in Mexico after a bloody battle with the Arellano-Felix Organization, the Tijuana cartel that had been responsible for up to 80 percent of the cocaine smuggled into the United States, mostly through California, DEA Special Agent in Charge Errol J. Chavez said.

                Chavez, who oversees the DEA's Arizona operations and who spoke to The Republic several months ago on the topic, said Zambada-Garcia is part of a loose group of traffickers known as the "Kings of Cocaine."

                The DEA believes Zambada-Garcia had Ramon Arellano-Felix killed in February 2002, although it had been initially reported he had been killed in a shootout with Mexican police, Chavez said.

                That murder, followed a month later by the arrest of his brother, Benjamin Arellano-Felix, allowed Zambada-Garcia to gain a stronger foothold on drug trafficking.

                The Colombians, after years of dealing primarily with the Arellano-Felix Organization, suddenly found that they could not move as much cocaine because of the weakened state of the Tijuana cartel.

                So they began selling larger amounts of cocaine to Zambada-Garcia, whose control over the Southwestern border grew.
                But because of a higher security along the California border and the potential of bloodshed with members of the Arellano-Felix Organization, Zambada-Garcia turned his attention to the Arizona border.
                "He is following the path of least resistance," Chavez said.

                Authorities on Thursday unsealed indictments against Zambada-Garcia and his three top lieutenants, including his son, Vicente Zambada-Niebla. Meanwhile, DEA agents raided a restaurant in Tucson, El Mezon del Cobre, and served four other search warrants in Tucson and Nogales.

                DEA Supervisory Special Agent Tony Ryan, public information agent in Tucson, said 100 pounds of marijuana, 1 kilo of cocaine, $30,000 in cash and six high-end vehicles were seized.

                The investigation began in December 2001 after authorities seized more than 10 tons of Colombian cocaine on a fishing vessel off the Pacific coast of Mexico.

                The shipment was linked to the Zambada-Garcia Organization.
                Since then, authorities have made 240 arrests and seized about 13 tons of cocaine, 12.5 tons of marijuana, 108 pounds of methamphetamine, 1 pound of heroin and more than $8.3 million in cash.

                DEA officials, who are grateful for the cooperation from Mexico and Colombia, expect more arrests, some possibly in the Valley, which is known as a major hub for Mexican drug traffickers.
                "If I was a member of the Zambada-Garcia Organization, I would be worried right now," Ryan said.


                --


                Illegal aliens are just "hard working people trying to make a better life for themselves by doing the jobs that Americans won't do." And so are bank robbers, terrorists, rapists, killers, kidnappers, ***s and thieves. Illegal aliens aren't criminal invaders. They're just undocumented workers and bank robbers are just unauthorized people making early withdrawals.

                Comment


                • #53
                  August 1, 2003


                  Customs Seizes More Than a Half-Million Dollars at El Paso Port





                  The Associated Press
                  EL PASO "” More than a half-million dollars concealed in a pickup truck headed into Mexico has been seized by U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection agents at the El Paso Port of Entry.
                  After examining the Chevrolet Cheyenne early Wednesday, inspectors found a false compartment in a toolbox in the bed of the truck. The compartment contained $692,543 and 50 rounds of .357 ammunition.
                  "It's one of the biggest (money seizures) we've seen," said Roger Maier, a spokesman for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He said no arrests had been made as of midday Friday, but the agency is investigating the source of the money.
                  In many cases, money similarly concealed comes from illegal drug profits, he said.
                  "The history on the border is that drugs go north and money goes south," Maier said, adding that investigators also are looking at other possible sources including terrorist activities.
                  "CBP's priority mission is to keep terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering our country," said Luis Garcia, director of the bureau's El Paso Field Office.
                  "Intermittent southbound inspections are also an important part of our overall enforcement strategy as we try to stop smuggled currency, weapons, ammunition, unlicensed technology, fugitives, and stolen vehicles from leaving the United States," he said.
                  Also on Wednesday, inspectors at the Bridge of the Americas cargo facility in El Paso seized 3,267 pounds of marijuana.
                  Inspectors at the primary inspection booths noticed that a commercial vehicle had been abandoned in the line of vehicles approaching the inspection area.
                  Bureau inspectors opened the back of the truck and smelled marijuana and spotted numerous cardboard boxes. They opened the boxes and discovered bundles the marijuana

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I think Matthew A has hit it right on the head! Your cut and paste must be worn out. I have said it from the get go, come up with your own ideas! You are a joke who will be as you are. I really must say I feel sorry for you. To be so angry must be so stressful maybe you should see a doctor. Maybe you could get SSI to fill your meds because anyone who has read anything you have wrote/cut/pasted knows your a few fries short of a happy meal. By the way who do you think is making those happy meals???

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      http://www.latimes.com/features/prin...n29jul20.story a d v e r t i s e m e n t




                      Undermining American workers
                      Record numbers of illegal immigrants are pulling wages down for the poor and pushing taxes higher.
                      By Fred ****ey
                      Special to The Times

                      July 20, 2003

                      T he perils of illegal immigration rattle around in the attic of public policy like a troubled spirit. We pretend not to hear the dragging chains because we don't know how to silence them, but the ghosts will endure, especially in California. Because the nation can't control its borders, the number of illegal immigrants grows by an estimated half-million each year. They come because we invite them with lax law enforcement and menial jobs. Their presence makes our own poor more destitute, creating a Third World chaos in the California economy that we are only beginning to understand.

                      Patricia Morena has no time for a philosophical discussion on unauthorized immigration. She lives with it, or tries to. She's a U.S. citizen of Mexican descent, and a motel maid in Chula Vista, six miles north of the border. She's short and heavyset, and dresses with care in tasteful thrift shop. She earns $300 before taxes, when she's fortunate enough to have a five-day week. She's a single mom with three children, all stuffed into a ratty little one-bedroom apartment. The eldest, an 18-year-old boy, has taken to stealing; she thinks it's because he's always been poor.

                      Sitting in the pale yellow kitchen light, she looks resigned rather than angry. She has the fear of anyone who's 39, broke and tired: being replaced. If she didn't have to compete with unauthorized workers in the cheap motels that cluster just north of the border, she thinks, she could lift her wages from $7.50 per hour to maybe $10 and bargain for some health insurance.

                      But she won't ask for a raise. "If I ask for money, the bosses say, 'I can get a young girl who is faster and cheaper,' " she says. "The bosses have power over illegals. They know they're afraid and not going to ask for overtime, even though I know the law says they should get it." So Morena remains mired, one of 32.9 million people the U.S. Census Bureau says lived in poverty in 2001.

                      The 1996 welfare reform act was pitched as a means for poor people to elevate themselves through work. President Clinton said at the time that the act was "to give them a chance to share in the prosperity and the promise that most of our people are enjoying today."

                      Well, seven years later, Morena is still poor. Although she never studied economics, she has learned a fundamental economic truth: The only leverage unskilled workers have is scarcity of labor. Morena can't work her way up the economic ladder because the bottom rungs have been broken off by the weight of millions of new illegal workers. The census bureau says the number of illegal immigrants in the country doubled in the 1990s, from 3.5 million to 7 million, the largest such increase in the nation's history.

                      So Morena soldiers on at $7.50 an hour, living with a reality that the late Cesar Chavez, champion of the farm worker, understood back in the 1960s. Chavez, says David M. Kennedy, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian from Stanford University, advocated limited immigration to protect the wage levels of the Chicano workers he struggled to unionize. Without such restrictions, demand for labor would fall, and with it the pressure to pay higher wages.

                      The people who traditionally benefit from the Patricia Morenas and other low-paid workers are ****her up the economic ladder"”businesses, industries and homeowners. For them, stagnant low wages mean they can hire maids, farm laborers, seamstresses, roofers and carpet cleaners for about the same wages as they paid a quarter-century ago. That helps industries grow cheap lettuce and make down-market shirts. It frees up enough money for homeowners to afford those sports cars whose price tripled even as the cost of getting their lawn mowed stayed the same.

                      Yet the relentless flow of illegal labor is now changing life for Californians on those higher rungs too.

                      apart from the proliferation of workers standing on street corners waiting for jobs, it's difficult to see that migration from Mexico into California during the past two decades is on a scale that astonishes even those who specialize in making sense out of human patterns. One such expert is Victor Davis Hanson, a professor of classics at Cal State Fresno and the author of "Mexifornia," a recent book that reveals the extent of the changing culture and demographics of California. He says that no immigration in American history even remotely compares to the one underway along the southwest border, which, incidentally, is the longest that has ever separated First- and Third World countries.

                      Today, nearly half of California's residents are immigrants or the children of immigrants, and the state's population is projected to increase by 52%, to 49 million, between 2000 and 2025. An estimated 950,000 Mexicans without papers live in the five-county Greater Los Angeles area, says Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at the Urban Institute public policy center in Washington, D.C. They are mostly nested in communities of the 2.4 million Mexican-born migrants. Statewide, there are 1.6 million undocumented Mexicans, and 4.8 million in the country, Passel says. They make up more than half of the 8.5-million-plus undocumented persons of all nationalities.

                      The image of migrants popularized by their advocates is of work-tough campesinos who cross the border spitting on their hands and eagerly looking for shovels. That is true to a considerable extent, because a lot of shoveling gets done. As the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says in support of a new amnesty for unauthorized immigrants: "There are approximately 10 million undocumented workers employed throughout the country who are working hard and performing tasks that most Americans take for granted but won't do themselves."

                      The second half of that sentence has been accepted as a truth for generations. Illegal immigrants are just doing the work Americans won't. But is it true today?

                      In April, I shopped for a contractor to paint my house trim. I got three bids. One was for $1,600, about $400 less than the others. The only condition was that payment be in cash. That wasn't remarkable. Is there a Californian alive who doesn't know they can pay under the table for cheap immigrant labor? You pay cash. There are no checks. There is no tax record.

                      But this bargain didn't come from an undocumented worker. It came from an established businessman with good references. I asked why the ethical gyrations.

                      He vented: "If I'm going to stay in business, I have to do what the illegals do. They never pay taxes, on profits or on their employees' pay. Right there, I'm at a 20% disadvantage. They'll come in here with about six guys with paintbrushes who work for peanuts, do a fair job, and then they're gone." These competitors have driven every American out of gardening, he added, and are doing it to house-painting, roofing and car repair. He concluded in frustration, "What am I supposed to do?"

                      Roy Beck, executive director of Numbers USA Education and Research Foundation, a Washington, D.C., organization devoted to immigration control, says it's not that millions of unemployed Americans "are too lazy and shiftless to bus tables or wash dishes." What the Chamber of Commerce and like-minded business groups really mean, he says, is that "Americans won't work like slaves, like serfs. Americans want to be paid and treated fairly."

                      "The National Restaurant Assn., for one, doesn't want their customers to know that this system forces illegal workers to live in abject poverty," Beck says. "It's the serfdom thing. If customers thought about it, they'd say, 'No, I don't want people who are hidden in the kitchen or serving me to be so poor and neglected that they might be TB carriers, and hate my guts for not caring about them.' "

                      Terry Anderson, a black talk-radio host in Los Angeles, says he sees similar displacement throughout the African American community. "I defy you to find a black janitor in L.A.," Anderson says. "In the '70s, the auto body-repair business in South-Central was pretty much occupied by blacks. Those jobs are all gone now. They're all held by Hispanics, and all of them are illegals. And those $25 jobs that blacks used to hold in the '70s now pay $8 to $10, and a black man can't get hired even if he's expert. It's absolute discrimination, because there's a perception that a Hispanic works better. Well, he works cheaper. They're in the country illegally, so they have no bargaining power, and the wages get driven down."

                      The point he and Beck make is decidedly not a racial one, not black versus Latino or Mexican versus white. Their point is about money. Illegal, powerless immigrants versus relatively empowered American citizens. Who among us could survive if every day, the streets outside our workplaces were lined with people willing to do our jobs for two-thirds or half the pay because in the world they came from, in the world where their money is sent, half of our pay amounted to riches?

                      Anderson particularly despairs of the effect the scarcity of low-end jobs has on poor youths. In May, 6.1 million whites and 1.7 million blacks in the country were unemployed. But of those without jobs, young people took the worst hit. The unemployment rate for whites ages 16 to 19 in the labor force was 15.4%, with 892,000 unemployed; for black teenagers, it was 270,000 out of work, at a scary 35% rate.

                      These kids are the millions of potential burger-flippers and mowers of lawns that Beck and Anderson say employers are bypassing in favor of undocumented migrants. "There was this kid in my neighborhood"”good kid, 17 years old, and he goes down to the local McDonald's to get an after-school job," Anderson says. "The manager tells him that because he doesn't speak Spanish, she can't hire him because it would have a disruptive effect on all the other workers who don't speak English. I mean, think of that: Here's a kid trying to get a little ahead"”American born, four generations in South-Central"”who's told he can't sell French fries because he can't speak a foreign language. You want to talk about disillusionment?"

                      as cheap, illegal workers flood the labor force, governments and taxpayers are feeling the pinch. Just as one dishonest act often leads to another, illegal labor has led to other illegalities. The most pervasive is the untaxed cash transaction. It has created a surging "underground economy" that has become a hole in society's pocket through which falls many of our democratic values, and a lot of loose cash.

                      John Chiang of Los Angeles, one of five members of the state Board of Equalization, California's tax oversight agency, says off-the-books businesses can have a "profoundly dislocating effect" on the economy. It pushes some businesses to compete by also cutting legal corners, and discourages other businesses from coming to California.

                      A study last year by the Economic Roundtable, a Los Angeles research group, found that the underground sector in Southern California probably accounts for 20% or more of the economy, says economist Dan Flaming, author of the report. Nationwide, the International Monetary Fund reported in a 2002 issues paper, underground work amounted to 10% of the total economy.

                      As the underground sector surged in the '90s, an unpleasant snowball began to gather mass. The amount of tax revenues generated by the economy didn't keep pace with the population growth and accompanying rise in demands for government services. That, in turn, "adds significantly to the tax burden of honest taxpayers," Chiang says. He estimates that the state is losing $7 billion a year in unpaid taxes.

                      The state Employment Development Department's estimates are somewhat lower, at $3 billion to $6 billion annually in lost income and wage-related taxes. Any way it's counted, that's a pile of money for a state running a $38-billion deficit that Sacramento is attempting to close by cutting services, raising taxes and borrowing money.

                      Certainly, not all of the loss is due to illegal immigrants, and the state, with scrupulous political sensitivity, avoids placing blame there. But Jerry Hicks, whose job until recently was to measure the underground economy for the Employment Development Department, reluctantly agrees that common sense would put undocumented workers at the head of the tax-avoidance list. It's anybody's guess how much fault lies with businesses forced to compete by dealing in cash.

                      That loss of tax revenue is key to understanding why unchecked illegal immigration creates a downward economic spiral. Jan. C. Ting, Temple University law professor and former assistant commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, says the swelling population of poor people who have little more than manual labor to offer, and who pay few taxes, will inevitably draw heavily on social services. That drain will, in turn, increase taxes on businesses and homeowners, who may depart for other states, which in turn will drive tax rates even higher.

                      An often-cited National Research Council study in 1997 concluded that each native household in California was paying $1,178 a year in state and local taxes to cover services used by immigrant (legal and illegal) households. The demand for such offsetting taxes undoubtedly has increased in proportion to the numbers of illegal immigrants since then.

                      What is known is how the tax drain is changing society. As the IMF's issue paper warned last year, the lost revenue can lead to "a deterioration in the quality and administration of the public goods such as roads and hospitals provided by the government."

                      Hospitals provide a clear warning signal. Here's how it happens: An illegal immigrant, without health insurance, has a serious health problem and goes to a public hospital, incurring a catastrophic medical cost. At bargain basement wages, that patient has as much chance of paying the hospital bill as paying off the national debt. So the patient scribbles out a passable IOU, and disappears.

                      Someone else pays. America's health system draws its lifeblood from private health insurance, and if large numbers of patients have no insurance or can't pay, the money has to be taken from taxes"”siphoned from the state treasury. A robust society can absorb a certain amount of those losses, but if the tax base isn't expanding as fast as the demands placed on it, the system begins to shut down"”as Los Angeles County's has.

                      In 2002, 33% of L.A. County residents were without health insurance or were grossly underinsured. The county thinks that rate is the highest in the United States, which helps to explain why the county prepared to close two hospitals last year because there was too much demand and too little revenue.

                      Carol Gunter is acting director of county emergency medical services, the person who has to try to run a "business" in which about a quarter of the customers don't have the means to pay for her product, but are entitled to its full service. So just how many emergency room patients are illegal? Federal law prevents her from knowing because hospitals are forbidden to ask about citizenship. What Gunter does know is that, despite billion-dollar federal bailouts, the number of public L.A. County hospitals recently went from six to five, and another is going to close.

                      In March, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein announced she had joined other senators in supporting a bailout bill to reimburse state and local hospitals for emergency medical costs incurred by undocumented immigrants. She estimated those costs in California at $980 million in the past year. Celebration over the proposal becomes somewhat muted when we consider that a bailout is"”by sinking-lifeboat definition"”intended to overcome the effects of a leak, and her statement mentioned nothing about patching the boat. Feinstein declined to be interviewed on the subject.

                      Jim Lott, executive vice president of the Hospital Assn. of Southern California, puts it bluntly: "We are in a [health-care] meltdown in Los Angeles County to the extent we have never seen before."

                      The state can't be far behind. An estimated 20% of patients throughout California are uninsured, with hospitals incurring $3.6 billion in uncompensated care. Fifty-one percent of the state's hospitals operated in the red last year.

                      After the "please pay cash" painting contractor left my house, I put pencil to paper on the bids. Considering that his line of work is labor-intensive, if I accepted the above-board bid of $2,000, probably about $1,500 would go toward wages, and maybe 10% of that would go to the government. If I went for the underground bid, I would get off cheaper"”and the government would lose $200. Multiply that by the countless such transactions in California daily, and a lot of hospitals are going to run short, and a lot of potholes are going to grow.

                      author hanson describes the practical effect of the massive immigration numbers: "The unfortunate message we give migrants is, 'You can work here, but only undercover, and you can't join our society.' "

                      Chiang sees the same ominous divisions. "California is becoming a dichotomy society"”high-wealth, low-wealth; educated, undereducated; and the underground economy plays a large role in creating the unregulated atmosphere that tends to widen those social and economic gaps."

                      So the people on either side of the divide go to their corners. The wealthy to West L.A. and its counterparts around the state. The poor? "We have towns in the Central Valley that are"”literally"”100% Mexican, and consist mainly of illegal migrants," Hanson says. "In those towns, Spanish is the only language spoken; there is no industry, and the towns are huge pockets of poverty. We can legitimately fear that this is the California of the future."

                      Two small cities of about the same size in Fresno County underscore Hanson's point. The town of Parlier in 2000 was 97% Latino, with 36% of the town living in poverty, and a per capita income of $7,078, Hanson says. The town of Kingsburg, whose population was 34% Latino, had just 11% living in poverty. The per capita income was $16,137.

                      The dependence upon agricultural labor, which usually has to be done by hand, puts a low ceiling on what immigrants can earn. That ceiling could be lifted either by stemming the flow of illegal labor, or by mechanizing the farm work. But neither is happening, which suits many farmers just fine.

                      Philip Martin, professor of agricultural and resource economics at UC Davis, says farmers could quickly mechanize labor-intensive harvesting if it were not so cheap to hire migrants. "Back in the late '60s and '70s, there was a fear there wouldn't be enough farm workers, so that spurred mechanization research," Martin says. "Then there were 70-some subsidized projects at the University of California aimed at figuring out how to pick oranges mechanically. Today, there aren't any, because there is plenty of cheap farm labor. There is probably a machine available to harvest every crop grown in the U.S., but they won't be used as long as the laborers are available at low wages."

                      Martin's point reveals this turned-around truism: Agriculture in Mexico is modernizing, which forces many laborers off their jobs there. Machines are displacing laborers in the cornfields of Mexico, so they come north to the "advanced" United States to pick fruits and vegetables by hand.

                      Because the United States makes no real effort to count its undocumented workers, their true impact on the job market is unclear. Common sense does say, however, that if millions of Mexicans are here illegally, they must be working or they would go home. An estimated $10 billion was sent back to Mexico in 2002 by workers in the United States, an increase of $800 million from the year before, says the nonprofit Pew Hispanic Center in Washington, D.C.

                      The migrants who come north used to be regarded as sellouts or deserters in Mexican society. Now, they're heroes praised by Mexican President Vicente Fox for the money they inject into that faltering economy. That is also a first, Hanson says. "Mexico is a failing society that stays afloat by exporting human capital. If you shut that border down, in five years you'd have a revolution, because Mexico can't meet the aspirations of its own people."

                      there is no question that illegal immigration greatly troubles Americans. The polls show it, both before and after 9/11. They want them to go home. One poll even showed that almost two-thirds want the military to patrol the border. Of course, they never gripe about the cheap hamburgers or the low-cost gardening that migrants make possible.

                      Yet, curiously, in a decade of unprecedented illegal immigration, the issue has been put on the back burner by most of society's seers and opinion-formers.

                      Illegal immigrants are the people we used to call illegal aliens in a coarser time. Now, to some, even "undocumented workers" is too harsh so they've adopted "unauthorized." To many critics of illegal immigration, this tiptoe nomenclature is part of the problem. They say a debate or consensus on the issue is made impossible by a barricade of political correctness, up against which a critic is in danger of that paralyzing accusation"”racist.

                      Most politicians would rather swallow their tongues than talk about illegal immigration, and **** Morris thinks he knows why. Morris, the former political strategist for Bill Clinton, says both political parties, "especially the Republicans, have to know they're running out of white people to split up. Any major politician is facing dodo bird extinction if he or she fails to reach out to Hispanics. It scares them."

                      Hanson believes the politics of immigration is about greed and power more than ideology. "It's one of those issues that's backed by strange bedfellows"”on the right, you have big business types who want open borders to make money on cheap labor, and don't care about social consequences. On the other side, you have this left-wing racist"”I think it's racist"”separatist industry of Latino groups and leftist legislators" who want more immigration because it expands their power base.

                      Quixotically, on the border south of San Diego, the U.S. runs a version of "Checkpoint Charlie" to keep them out. Operation Gatekeeper started in 1994 to stem the flow of illegal immigration north by clamping down on the main ports of entry in the Southwest. In addition to forcing many border crossers to attempt a dangerous trip across the desert, it has had the unintended consequence of transforming a fluid population that used to go back and forth into one that simply stays here.

                      An unauthorized worker probably would prefer to work in this country and return home as often as possible, preserving his Mexican roots. Gatekeeper, however, has cemented that worker's feet in the U.S. It's not hard to understand his hesitancy to go home for a holiday or family event if he knows there's a good chance he'll be caught on his return. So, he does the obvious thing: He hires a coyote (outlaw immigrant trafficker) to bring his whole family north, often one member at a time.

                      so, what are the options? close the borders and kick out the undocumented as some arch-conservatives want? Or, on the other extreme, open the borders completely, as libertarians and some Latino groups tend to favor? On both counts, forget about it. Not going to happen. And you can trash amnesty at the present time, too. The War on Terrorism and the tension it has caused between Mexico and the United States, plus a sour remembrance from the results of the 1986 amnesty law, closed the book on "regularization," as Bush and Fox euphemistically called amnesty in the fond days of their mutual affection a couple years ago. A 2002 poll by Zogby International, a polling firm, showed that 65% of Americans opposed a new amnesty.

                      When the nation tried amnesty 17 years ago, the whole idea was to combine it with a crackdown on hiring illegal workers. Guess what? The amnesty worked for 2.8 million migrants, putting them on the track for citizenship; the crackdown did not, as the rising numbers of illegal crossings demonstrate.

                      The first amnesty seemed likely to only lead to another, and then another. An advocate of controlled borders is Cecilia Muñoz, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, the group considered an arch defender of illegal migration. Muñoz says undocumented immigration is bad for both the country and the workers, so she supports amnesty to make them legal, calling it "earned legalization." Her enthusiasm flags, though, when asked if the government should crack down on subsequent illegal immigration that undoubtedly would follow a new amnesty.

                      But her convictions don't falter. "We are going to ultimately succeed because we're all complicit in this system. We don't like it, but we benefit" from it, and therefore should grant the laborers amnesty.

                      The last-gasp alternative to amnesty seems to be a "guest-worker program." The guest-worker idea had two antecedents, one from 1917 to 1921, and another, known as the bracero program, from 1942 to 1964. Each was started in response to farmers' complaints of wartime labor shortages. After studying both, professor Martin is convinced that "there's nothing more permanent than temporary workers." He realizes the folly of inviting a poor laborer into a comparative worker's paradise, and then expecting him to run along home when the job is finished.

                      David Lorey, author of the scholarly "The U.S.-Mexican Border in the 20th Century," says the lesson of the bracero experience "is that guest-worker programs encourage migration." He adds, "There were horrible conditions in the migrant camps, and a lot of abuses that resulted from this neither-fish-nor-fowl program."

                      In retrospect, the lasting effect of the bracero program was to draw workers north to the border and give them a taste of American wages. For example, in 1940, Mexicali, a Mexican border town south of El Centro, had a population of less than 20,000 people. In 1960, it was 175,000. The programs succeeded in drawing workers, especially in agriculture, but also left a legacy of exploitation and ineffective regulation that has made bracero a dirty word in the lexicon of Mexican migration.

                      Memories of the abuses leave Hispanic groups skittish to the idea of guest-worker programs. But Brent Wilkes, executive director of the powerful League of United Latin American Citizens, says that his organization might support such a program provided the workers have labor rights equal to those of American laborers, and have an inside-track to eventual citizenship

                      However, law professor Ting calls a guest-worker program in any form unworkable. "It's camouflaged amnesty. No one wants to use the word 'amnesty' because the American people recognize it for what it is"”admitting defeat of our immigration system. So, they say, 'Let's call it something else. Let's call it a 'guest-worker program.' "

                      The vacillation over how to effectively control illegal migration drives a senior immigration investigator right up the wall, because he believes the bureaucracy has the answer in its own hands. The investigator has more than 20 years' experience with the INS. Still, he believes he must remain anonymous for fear of retribution.

                      Currently, he explains, the law requires an employer to make a good-faith effort to ascertain that applicants have valid identification. However, he considers that law a political con job because it gives unscrupulous employers an easy out: They can't be held responsible for not having the expertise to identify illegal or forged documents, so anything short of those being written in crayon can pass muster. The biggest abuses, he says, are of forged immigrant registration cards (green cards) and Social Security cards.

                      What frustrates him is his conviction that a procedure is already in place that would "immediately identify 70% of the illegal workforce." He explains that as a part of the 1986 immigration law, a voluntary employee verification pilot program was established, and is still operating. Under the program, the validity of Social Security cards and green cards can be quickly checked on all new employees by phone or online. He says the system could easily be expanded into a mandatory nationwide computer hookup by cross-indexing the data bases of the immigration service with the Social Security Administration. The effect would be that honest employers could instantly ascertain the legality of their workforce, and dishonest employers would have no excuse for hiring undocumented workers.

                      Bill Strasberger, a spokesman for the immigration service, says the pilot program is considered successful. "Employers using it are pleased, and so are we. It provides verification with confidentiality." Asked if it would be expanded or made mandatory by Congress, he laughed briefly, then said, "It really is the direction we need to move in."

                      Why, then, aren't we doing it? The investigator says that Congress refuses to make the program mandatory so as not to offend big agribusiness and other industries that freely employ illegal workers. These industries then take some of those profits and give generously to members of Congress.

                      Beck's organization, which advocates immigration control, plans to push for a mandatory employee-verification law. "The American people would not stand for a massive deportation, so what we need to do is use this program to dry up the jobs, then most illegals would gradually go home." If such a law was enacted, he says, the end result would be American workers gravitating to those jobs for slightly higher wages. "You'd end up paying 25 cents more for a hamburger and a dime more for lettuce. Big deal."

                      This affluent society can certainly afford more expensive hamburgers, but can it afford the hidden costs that currently make those burgers and fries dirt cheap? As Beck asks, "How many unskilled illegal migrants do we allow in? Forty million? Fifty million? What is the end point?"

                      Fred ****ey last wrote for the magazine about Indian gaming in California.'There was this good kid, 17, who goes down to the local McDonald's to get a job,' says Terry Anderson, a talk-radio host. 'The manager tells him she can't hire him because he doesn't speak Spanish. Here's a kid trying to get a little ahead"”American born, four generations in South-Central"”who's told he can't sell French fries because he can't speak a foreign language. You want to talk about disillusionment?"There is probably a machine available to harvest every crop grown in the U.S., but they won't be used as long as the laborers are available at low wages,' says Philip Martin, professor of agricultural and resource economics at UC Davis. Yet, in Mexico, machines are displacing laborers in the cornfields, so they come north to the "advanced" United States to pick fruits and vegetables by hand.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I sure hope you don't BREED!!!!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Dawn

                          Interesting Dawn ,that you stink of hypocrisy , you tell folks to break our laws , but then I am sure you and Lunker call the police any time you feel your rights have been violated, you use our rights and freedoms against, us , when it benefits you , your all for our LAW and then BADMOUNTH us when they don't ,you all hide among us just like the terrorists did., illegals provided cover for them to kill over 3000 people form all over the world and sold them the IDS to do so... I am attacked for simply excursing my RIGHTS and post the FACTS which make you all look like the parasites you are!! It is too much to ask that you come here legally , how sad excuses your are for human beings, look at the lives you have effected of your follow human beings, THESE Folks have had to move from there homes because you have turned Calif into a cesspool, like I have said Calif will implode on itself because of illegally immigration, it has a budget deficit bigger then ALL OTHER STATES COMBINED.

                          Exodus to other states tops new arrivals
                          Population still soaring from births and foreign influx
                          Tyche Hendricks, Chronicle Staff Writer
                          Wednesday, August 6, 2003
                          ©2003 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback
                          URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...6/MN274495.DTL

                          Driven by the high cost of housing and the aggravation of traffic jams,
                          Californians fled the Golden State for places like Nevada and Arizona in the late 1990s, according to a report released today by the U.S. Census Bureau.
                          It was the first time more people left for other states than moved to California from other states, and the trend is continuing, experts say.
                          Last year, Miiko Mentz, a 39-year-old Cupertino native who works in public relations, steered her U-Haul truck southeast, following hundreds of thousands of others who left California in the latter half of the 1990s.
                          "We went from paying $3,000 a month in rent to a mortgage of $1,490," said Mentz, who moved with her husband from San Jose to Chandler, Ariz., a Phoenix suburb, last year. "Our house here is 2,700 square feet, and we have a pool. It was the right choice."
                          Mentz said Phoenix has all the sports teams, rock concerts, restaurants and shopping malls she wants, and she doesn't have to commute and work long hours to pay a sky-high Bay Area mortgage.
                          The most popular destinations for others joining the exodus were Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Washington, Oregon and Colorado.
                          "Is the luster off the Golden State? In some ways, it is," said Hans Johnson, a research fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, based in San Francisco. "People move to these other states for some of the same reasons they came to California a couple of decades ago: opportunities and quality of life."
                          MIDDLE-CLASS FLIGHT
                          And the migration out of California has continued into this decade, with a net loss of 167,000 residents from April 2000 to July 2002, said Bill Frey, a senior fellow of demographic studies at the Milken Institute in Santa Monica.
                          "It's a middle-class crunch," said Frey. "They're following the American dream to get more space for less money. And it's now clear that the big urban areas in California don't provide that affordable middle-class housing and lifestyle that they once did."
                          Although California lost 755,000 more residents to other states than it took in between 1995 and 2000, it still experienced a big jump in population from foreign immigration and births.
                          The state's population rose between 1990 and 2000 to nearly 33.9 million, a 14 percent increase. Its foreign-born population went up by more than one- third to almost 8.9 million.
                          California's two largest urban areas -- the Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange County metropolitan area and the Bay Area -- lost the most people to other states. That movement out of California mirrors a continuing migration from big cities in the Northeast to places like Atlanta, Orlando, Fla., and Charlotte, N.C., Frey said.
                          New York, Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania also lost more residents to other states than they took in.
                          California still attracts college-educated migrants from other parts of the country who find highly skilled jobs here and may be attracted by the state's cultural riches.
                          "We've never had a problem finding people who want to live here," Johnson said.
                          California is also still an important gateway for immigrants from abroad, both skilled and unskilled, and many put down roots here. But a substantial minority of those in the new census report who left California are immigrants seeking employment and a lower cost of living, according to Professor Dowell Myers of the University of Southern California's Population Dynamics Research Group.
                          Though California lost population to 38 other states, it's not a sign that the state is on the skids, said Myers.
                          "In no way is this a setback for California," he said. "It's just a balancing mechanism. I think most Californians would be glad that somebody left. Otherwise, we would be overflowing."
                          The most recent exodus has been less severe than that in the late 1980s, when recession was accompanied by the upheaval of earthquakes and the Los Angeles riots, said Myers.
                          Even with the dot-com crash, the fiscal crisis and the pending gubernatorial recall election, "California is still on the recovery path," Myers said. "The underpinnings are solid, because of the economic vitality of the residents and the basic attractions of the state."
                          NO REGRETS
                          All that may be, but Kathy Knecht is not sorry she left her native Bay Area two years ago.
                          Knecht, 42, gave up a job as an administrative assistant in Santa Clara and moved with her family to Carson City, Nev.
                          "We have a 2-year-old daughter and wanted to raise her in a smaller area," she said. "I wanted to stay home with her full time. If we'd stayed there, it would have been more difficult."
                          Knecht has had a hard time getting used to snowy winters, and she misses going to Giants games, but her new house is more than double the size of the home she left in Los Altos.
                          "This is a nice area," she said. "And I was getting tired of the congestion in the Bay Area."

                          E-mail Tyche Hendricks at thendricks@sfchronicle.com.
                          CHART 1:

                          California's changing population

                          California's overall population increased from 32,062,912 in 1995 to 33,871,
                          648 in 2000. But in terms of domestic migration, more people left the state
                          than moved to it:

                          Number of people who left California and moved to another state 2,204,500
                          Number who migrated to California from another state 1,448,964
                          Net migration: - 755,536

                          Source: Chronicle research
                          Chronicle Graphic
                          .
                          CHART 2:

                          LARGEST STATE-TO-STATE MIGRATION FLOWS

                          State of State of Migration Reverse Net
                          origin destination flow flow migration

                          New York Florida 308,230 70,218 238,012
                          New York New Jersey 206,979 97,584 109,395
                          California Nevada 199,125 60,488 138,637
                          California Arizona 186,151 92,452 93,699
                          California Texas 182,789 115,929 66,860
                          Florida Georgia 157,423 99,225 58,198
                          California Washington 155,577 95,469 60,108
                          California Oregon 131,836 67,642 64,194

                          Source: U.S. Census Bureau
                          Chronicle Graphic

                          ©2003 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback
                          Page A - 1
                          The California Problem
                          Thursday, August 07, 2003
                          By Matt Hayes

                          Lawyers in California tell me that running an immigration law practice there is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing because of the sheer volume of Mexican illegal immigrants (search) flowing across the border who seek some form of legal immigration status.
                          But it's a curse because every practitioner knows that there is a much larger, untapped population of potential customers who will never seek the services of an immigration lawyer because they will never need them. As one friend told me: "In California, the distinction between having legal immigration status and no legal immigration status really is purely legal. There is no practical distinction at all."
                          The benefits in immigrating to California (search) have been known to Mexican nationals for at least a decade, but California's taxpayers are only now realizing the true cost. By some estimates, one-third of all illegal immigrants to the U.S. reside in California. The draws: programs like Medi-Cal (search), other state-based social programs, and a regulatory environment that is deliberately welcoming to the illegal immigrant. Though taxpayers have tried to end the steady flow of public money to illegal immigrants, politicians like Gov. Gray Davis (search), in poorly conceived efforts to curry the favor of yet one more interest group, have always stepped in to assure that the money continues to flow.
                          Proposition 187 (search), a ballot measure passed by voters in 1994, denied public benefits to illegal aliens. The day after voters passed it, groups such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (search) sued and sought a permanent injunction against Proposition 187 becoming law. An injunction remains in effect, and though Davis said during his campaign that he would appeal, he steadfastly refused to do so once he was elected. There is now a pending measure that would make obtaining a California driver's license much easier for illegal immigrants. Prior to his election being recalled, Davis had said that if the measure made it to his desk, he would sign it.
                          Los Angeles County is facing the closure of 16 hospitals and health care facilities because of looming insolvency. The problem is not that the facilities are underused. They are used too much, and because health care workers are not instructed -- some would say not permitted -- to inquire as to the immigration status of people seeking care, the facilities are saddled with millions in costs that are not reimbursable under the Medicaid (search) program. Medicaid reimburses medical facilities only for emergency treatment of illegal aliens. Because no inquiry as to immigration status or even residency is ever made, medical services that are not reimbursable under Medicaid are regularly rendered. As a result, Los Angeles County incurred a $360 million healthcare deficit in fiscal 2002 alone.
                          The Investigations Division of the California Department of Health Services (search) operated two port of entry Medi-Cal fraud detection programs; one called the Port of Entry Detection Program (search) the other the California Airport Residency Review (search). Both were highly successful, but were shut down because they were attacked by immigrants' rights groups.
                          In order to justify closing the program down, the California state auditor did an "investigation" and ordered the programs shut down. It issued a report in April 1999 (coinciding with the crescendo of pressure from immigrants' rights groups) that claimed the program was no longer justified. Any responsible governor and legislature would have found a way to improve the program to continue to deny benefits to illegal immigrants and other ineligible recipients. In all likelihood, it would have saved the state from the $30 billion deficit it now faces. Gray Davis wouldn't do it.

                          "Anti-borders groups will characterize any attempt to point out the negative impact of massive immigration on California's teetering health care system as 'blaming immigrants.' But, in a world in which nearly five billion people live in countries poorer than Mexico, the fact simply must be faced that California cannot be the emergency room to the world," says Craig Nelson, director of the advocacy group Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (search). "California taxpayers have the right to know how their health care tax dollars are being spent, who is getting that health care, and whether such provision violates any laws. At the very least, hospitals and other providers must begin gathering data on the immigration status of those accessing the system," Nelson says.
                          We can hope that Gov. Davis takes time to reflect on what brought him to a point at which he faces an historic recall election (search), but he probably won't. He has sold out California's taxpayers in a deliberate plan to remain in office by offending no one, except perhaps the 59 percent of Californians who voted for Proposition 187. The result is a record deficit and a popularity rating so low that many hardcore Democrats want him to leave office. Other states must look to California as an example of what happens to governors who refuse to address the problem of unchecked illegal immigration.
                          Matt Hayes began practicing immigration law shortly after graduating from Pace University School of Law in 1994, representing new immigrants in civil and criminal matters. He teaches at Berkeley College, and is author of The New Immigration Law and Practice, to be published in October.
                          Funding of Health Care Services in Los Angeles County
                          Dear Supervisors:
                          It is my understanding that your group has voted to close 16 community clinics, reduced by 25% funding for our network of private clinics partnering with the County to provide care, and approved the transition of High Desert Hospital to an ambulatory care center.
                          It is my further understanding that within the last decade, 50 emergency rooms and 17 trauma centers throughout Southern California have closed their doors, all because they couldn't afford to keep them open because of the ever increasing numbers of uninsured.
                          I'm aware of the recent study co-authored by Daniel Flaming, supported by data compiled by Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn's economic development team, that led researchers to estimate that about $1.1 billion a year is not being paid into Social Security, workers' compensation, health insurance, and other social safety-net programs to protect workers who became ill, injured, unemployed or retired, in violation of the law. This study estimated that 28 percent of the workforce in the county is paid in cash, and one in four don't have federal and state payroll taxes withheld, creating the kind of economic unpredictability that potential employers tend to avoid. We know that a large percentage of those without health insurance are illegal immigrants.
                          For historical perspective, I've also read the County's, 1992 "Impact of Undocumented Persons and Other Immigrants on Costs, Revenues and Services in Los Angeles County". This study revealed that for each dollar of tax revenue generated by the County's 700,000 adult illegal aliens into County coffers, it cost the County $39.50 to provide them with social services. And if one looks at the contributions by these same illegal immigrants to all levels of government, the Study further revealed that for ever dollar of tax revenue generated, these same adult illegal immigrants consumed $1.58 in social services.
                          So no one in County Government can claim any surprise about the huge financial albatross that illegal immigrants represent to Los Angeles County. While illegal immigrants certainly aren't the sole cause of this health care financial catastrophe, they nevertheless are a large component. While local county governments aren't responsible for the enforcement of federal immigration laws, they still get stuck with the check.
                          I'm certain that many U.S. citizens and legal residents are either denied L.A. County medical assistance or are greatly inconvenienced by having to queue-up with people who have no right to be in this country.
                          What distresses me further is the shameful silence by most of you supervisors about the policies of our national government that passes immigration laws which aren't enforced, and then rewards those who're successful in criminally breaching our borders with all kinds of educational, maternity, TANF and citizenship benefits. Can't you supervisors, at the bare minimum, go on public record and protest these travesties? Couldn't you instruct the L.A. County Sheriff to cooperate with the INS? Shouldn't your body play a leading role in getting the general public behind a movement to pressure the federal government to end the malfeasance and abuses of Uncle Sam? What's so sacrosanct about the reality that immigrant rights don't belong to those who have no right to be here?

                          Comment

                          Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                          Home Page

                          Immigration Daily

                          Archives

                          Processing times

                          Immigration forms

                          Discussion board

                          Resources

                          Blogs

                          Twitter feed

                          Immigrant Nation

                          Attorney2Attorney

                          CLE Workshops

                          Immigration books

                          Advertise on ILW

                          EB-5

                          移民日报

                          About ILW.COM

                          Connect to us

                          Questions/Comments

                          SUBSCRIBE

                          Immigration Daily



                          Working...
                          X