[Peace-discuss] Immigration and Black workers

[David Green]

Hi Karen,
   
  I think that the fallacy that tends to go unchallenged is that there are somehow a limited number of jobs, and that therefore some people are taking jobs away from others. But the limits are really those of natural resources to support a decent lifestyle for the population, the technological capability to utilize those resources, and the effect that the use of those resources has on the environment. That includes everything from land to food to water to wood to energy. Given basic resources, there are infinite ways to utilize human labor--look at what people are doing now, versus a century ago. Look at Cuban doctors. We're being told that immigrants are taking jobs Americans don't want, but they're only taking jobs that Americans won't work for poverty wages. In order to increase demand for those jobs among citizens, wages would have to be raised. That would be a free labor market, but that's not what elites in this country want. They want cheap labor to increase profits,
 they want to blame Americans (especially blacks) for not being willing to work for a non-living wage, they want to blame immigrants for taxing our resources when their cheap labor adds to elites' profits (and to our GDP), and they want working people to be blaming each other rather than the corporate structure.
   
  Obviously, resources are ultimately finite. But if progressives think that we can support 300 million people decently, then why wouldn't we be able to support 315 million people? It's all a matter of distribution, and of course distribution is a matter of ownership. Incidentally, some on this list might argue that it would be fair to distribute some of those resources to those involved in the work of childcare, institutionally-based or otherwise.
   
  DG

Karen Medina <kmedina at uiuc.edu> wrote:
  Dear Barbara,

That was a really good message from James Thindwa.

I have a question that is somewhat unrelated, but have been curious about. 

When women entered the work force, some people were predicting that women would take the jobs of men and male unemployment would be a problem. But from what I have experienced in my 43 years of living is that a larger workforce has increased the demand for more workers -- more childcare facilities, more restaurants, more time-saving services so that working people can actually go to work. 

I don't understand how legal immigrant workers are seen to take the jobs of citizens. If they are kept as illegal workers, then yes, they would be taking the jobs of others and not entering the economic exchange which includes both a supply and an increased demand.

-karen medina

---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 08:27:05 -0500
>From: "Barbara kessel" 
>Subject: [Peace-discuss] Immigration and Black workers 
>To: "Peace Discuss List" 
, "Mike Mulberry" , sf-core 
>
>I wrote to ask James Thindwa, the Illinois Director of Jobs with
>Justice and a Black American organizer and writer, for his views on
>the subject that Jenifer Cartwright has put before us on
>Peace-discuss. He responded...
>
>Barbara, re. "Another view of amnesty for illegal workers," here is what
>I think, and feel free to distribute, even in edited form.:
>
>It is beyond dispute that undocumented immigration disproportionately
>impacts low wage, mostly African American workers. The debate ought to
>be about what the solution is.
>
>Certainly, Black Americans should view with suspicion the right wing's
>newfound interest in their economic plight. If Republicans cared about
>low wage black workers, they would have supported the proposed minimum
>wage hike, living wage protocols across the country and health care
>reform, all of which disproportionately impact poor blacks. So, we know
>their motives are suspect. They are simply exploiting the plight of
>black workers to advance an anti-immigrant agenda.
>
>The fact is, what conservatives are prescribing as a solution will
>exacerbate, rather than ameliorate, the job crisis in the black community.
>Their insistence on punitive measures to further isolate and marginalize
>immigrants will guarantee a permanent reservoir of exploitable labor for
>employers. Undocumented immigrants with no rights cannot exercise basic
>workplace rights, such as joining a union. That is exactly what
>employers want. That vulnerability is what puts downward pressure on
>wages and hurts native born workers.
>
>If we agree that it is not feasible to deport 12 million undocumented
>people, then we must ask: what is the best solution? Our (the
>progressive) solution that calls for status legalization will confer
>rights on undocumented immigrants, and thus deny employers the cheap
>labor they want. With their newfound rights, immigrant workers can work
>with African American workers to build power in the workplace, form or
>join unions and fight for better wages—together. They can join other
>movements and organize around a broader, far reaching political agenda
>that includes national health care, global warming, school funding, Iraq
>War, post-Bush civil rights restoration, and so on.
>
>We need to force a public debate on these two alternative visions of
>immigration reform. The marginalization course sought by conservatives
>will ensure continued distress for low wage American workers, while the
>more humane, morally compelling course advocated by progressives
>promises to benefit both categories of workers, is consistent with
>American constitutional tenets of "freedom and equality for all" and
>imposes accountability on policy makers who have supported NAFTA-style
>trade deals. Indeed, policy makers should be put on the defensive for
>these trade agreements. That NAFTA and CAFTA have exacerbated
>undocumented immigration is no longer debatable. Where is the
>accountability of the politicians who continue to push these trade
>deals, even as we speak? I think we spend way too much time defending
>immigrants, instead of attacking trade policy. The Democrats and
>Republicans who gave us these trade agreements should be put on trial,
>not their immigrant victims.
>
>Finally, we should force Americans to reflect on what America will look
>like with 12 million people existing on the margins of politics and
>economy, devoid of all rights? Is that an America people can be
>comfortable with? And about the "border wall" as a solution, few believe
>it will work, and in a post-Cold War Era, this should be an insult to
>those who celebrate "freedom."
>
>James Thindwa
>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss


       
---------------------------------
Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070607/917ce6ad/attachment.html