All Americans are within their rights to express thier support or opposition to building a wall on American soil on the border.

Mexico however doesn't get to say a damn word about it. Fuck them!

Also the real id/voter id opposition in this nation is nothing but a ploy to allow the Democrats to committ massive fraud in the 2008 election.

You can't even rent a dvd in this country without showing your driver's license but it should be ok to vote without ID? What kind of bullshit is that. All of the leftist areguments about disenfranchisement are completely bogus. Fuck them too.

Howard (or Haim, if you prefer),

I've made this point a number of times, and you have unconsciously underscored it in your article. Nobody pays attention to the point.

America has a huge calling card to the world. A lady in the bay with the following words:

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

The communist Jewish woman (yes, Emma Lazarus was all three) who wrote these lines made America irresistible to the world. Even I, sitting upon the mountains of Samaria as I do, a man who left America to pursue a differnt dream, can feel the pull. And my father, may he rest in peace, pointed out the lines of the poem (which he knew by heart) and the fact that the woman who wrote them was a Jewish communist many times.

Knock down the statue! Get rid of the calling card! That is the way to send the Message that America's gates are closed to the tempest tossed and that the huddled masses of the world who yearn for freedom will have to look elsewhere.

When that statue was erected in 1880 somtheing, the only thing a potential immigrant to America had to worry about was being too sick or that his criminal record might follow him to the clerks on Ellis Island.

If your country has truly changed, then change the "IMMIGRANTS WANTED" sign in New York Harbor.

So long as it stands the message of Lady Liberty will continue to broadcast the hope of betterment to the poor masses of the world. All the laws in the world will not stop immigrants with that statue standing.

Are they also going to complain about the fortified wall they have along their border with Guatemala to keep Guatemalans out of Mexico?

Dave

When the Mexcian government gets all worked up about how dysfunctional and corrupt their government is, and works to address the reasons that Mexicans will risk their lives to sneak into this country all in order to gain an income for themselves and their families, then they can speak from some sort of high ground on this issue.

Ruvy, the borders are not being closed to legal immigration.

Howard, you aren't advocatin doing nothing versus illegal immigration ,but you don't provide any suggestions, either.

I'll admit, I don't have answers, but I do know that unchecked immigration causes problems that have been outlined in many articles on this topic. The situation will not improve if left unaddressed.

Ruvy,

Can you cite a source for Emma Lazarus having been a communist?

I've researched several biographies of her, and the closest I can come is that one of her editors, Morris Schappes, was one.

My good first sergeant,

Re-read Emma Lazarus' poem again. With an invitation like that, combined with America bragging about its wealth all over the international media, it is worth skirting the law, or breaking it, to get in.

That is how it looks over here, something you should know very well. You mean you haven't been asked in Iraq if you had some way for some poor guy to get a green card? I know I have.

What I'ms saying is, IF YOU DON'T WANT VISITORS, TAKE THE WELCOME SIGN DOWN! Screw the legalities. Take that big welcome sign down!!

Clavos,

I'll need to do some serious looking. Her left-wing sympathies were well known and the poen above has couple of lines missing.

Ruvy,

Here's an interesting capsule biography of Emma Lazarus from Nextbook.

This is the part I think you'll find particularly interesting:

During the refugee crisis of the early 1880s, she wrote a series of essays, published in The American Hebrew, which she called "Epistle to the Hebrews," a very in-your-face title. It alienated her from people on the right and left. She was thought of as being on the lunatic fringe for advocating a Jewish homeland. And there were some people who thought that she was a godless infidel who had a very enlightened and too modern sense of what it meant to be a Jew. She had a nationalist view of what Judaism meant. (emphasis mine)

Clavos,

Sounds like I would have liked to know this lady - kindred souls across a century...

I had to reason my way out of atheism, and lots of Jews would regartd much of what I think as rather on the edge and controversial. I keep the controversial stuff off this magazine (usually).

Well, gotta run soon.

Shsbbat Shalom,
Reuven

You guys are great, even Arch with whom I don't usually agree. SFC SKI gets the award for the most apt comment saying that I don't offer any suggestions to fix this problem. It is true. I don't know the answer. Ruvy is right about hypocrisy -- if we are now isolationists, belligerant and ready to fight everybody; let us pull the old woman down and go on record. If we want to remain "the melting pot", then let's have a viable immigration program.

SFC is right. I purposefully left out suggestions. This problem is more complex than building a boondoggle wall. That is my suggestion. It is time for some reasonable leadership, national discussion and debate and international planning wih the Mexicans and the Canadians. Somehow I can't believe a multi-billion dollar fence along PART of the border is going to do as much good as it costs -- except maybe for Boeing, Halliburton and Allied Texas Fence Builders.

Dave, there is no question about Mexico not having a high horse on which to sit. They do have problems with the Guatemalan border but, on this coast, a large number of Guatemalans live and are somewhat integrated. Our one excursion into the jungle along the border after a hurricane found only submerged dirt roads and a lonely military outpost that searched my Bronco and hung out for a while to practice their English. 2 little boys once had problems understanding my Spanish and the older told little brother, "He's probably Guatemalteco".

We have a problem. Latin America has a few of its' own. Therefore a lot of people from all over the world (What's new?) would like to come dream the American Dream. Throwing a down payment of 1.2 Billion US dollars at the problem is not a solution. It just makes us look richer and stupider.

archie: "Also the real id/voter id opposition in this nation is nothing but a ploy to allow the Democrats to committ massive fraud in the 2008 election."

you know, when a girlfriend asks you if you've cheated, you're supposed to think that maybe they are cheating...

i'd like to say that the real id/voter id law is nothing but a ploy to allow the Republicans to commit massive fraud in the 2008 election.

but then my first comment would turn around on me...

but we already suspected you...

ummm..ok..first off, the Statue of Liberty welcomes loegal immigrants...sorry, part of our cultural heritage..it stays... no talk of taking it down is going to be taken seriously...especially by those who have given up their citizenship andleft the Nation...

second... the fence... i think the Idea might be a decent start, but as the whole tunnel story (and there are plenty more) show, as well as the Berlin Wall's history... thededicated will get under/over/around any physical barrier if motivated enough

and there we begin to hit on what i think may be a clue to the Answer ina systemic sense... the motivation

pretty much all agree, the motivation is money...american dollars

how to removethemotivation for more to come into the Nation illegally...remove the motivation

enforce the Laws, and crack down on those who hire illegals..fines and jail time, do it hard and do it completely, make it a huge risk to hire an illegal, and less will be hired, thus removing the money motivation for more to break our Law and come here illegally

THEN we can begin the national discussion on what to do with the 8-12 million illegals already here

just a Thought

Excelsior?

I'm 110% for pulling down that damned statue & melting it into something more useful - like bullets to repel would-be coyotes & drug runners across our borders. Arch, NOT all 'leftists' are so bloody damned stupid & bleeding heart open to allowing every two-legged vermin who wants in to come here, Ted Kennedy notwithstanding. He sure as hell doesn't speak for THIS liberal, and never did on MOST issues. You gotta realize Kennedy is so far to the left he's almost an anarchist, and the whole damned clan has always been supergenerous when it comes to spending money - other people's, that is - and giving away rights that should be reserved for citizens only.

The wall will only work, IMO, if it's also got machine guns at intervals to mow the invaders down, or perhaps a no man's strip with explosives or electic shocks. As for the Mexicans' objection to the US building a wall, Arch is right: fuck them. They have NOTHING to say about what we do with our own border. Of course they'd love to have our borders open without restraint for them to send all their illiterate losers over here to be supported on our tax money. Bush should be bombing Mexico & points south, not Iraq. The teeming hispanic hordes are a bigger threat than Al Quaeda ever was.

Notice what race Miss Liberty is. She was erected to welcome Europeans to America, not Asians, not Africans, not Arabs. I'm surprised public enemy number one, Ted Kennedy, hasn't introduced a bill to tear down this symbol of white "racism" and replace it with some miscegenated yellow/black/brown abomination, to more acurately represent his vision for this country's execrable future.

well Richard, one coudl just as reasonably argue that the race of the lady in the sculpture has as much, if not more, to do with the nationality of the actual sculpter and his availabel choice of models, than it has to do with any kind of race agenda

also to note, in the poetry engraved on the statue, no mention of race or nationality is to be found, another bit of factual data which disputes your hypothesis

but hey, some people never let little things like Facts get in the way

i'm amazed no mention of the fact that the sculptor was french has come up yet...

Excelsior?

At a recent Mexican cabinet meeting Vincente Fox was heard to say "Fences? We don't need no stikin fences!"

some people never let little things like Facts get in the way

Facts like the Chinese Exclusion Act. Facts like country quotas based on how many people from those (predominately northern European) countries were already citizens.

No, America was intended to be a White nation. And it is that fact that made it so much dfferent in all the wonderful ways in which it was different - up until 1965, from what any other race ever produced in human history.

i guessthe forced importation of all those african people was justsome kind of aberration?

and aren't Hispanics just as European as anyone else?

seems like Richard has some kind of pigment problem

but, it is worth noting that he cites 1965 as the turning point...

you know, the end of the Jim Crowe laws

Excelsior?

the statue of liberty is green. she welcomes martians. or maybe the copper people of... hmm. anyway, what do you think this means:

"From her beacon-hand Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame,
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries shewith silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!""

sounds like "world-wide welcome," not "ye white folk, not ye yellows, browns and blacks." pretty fuckin obvious.

"No, America was intended to be a White nation. And it is that fact that made it so much dfferent in all the wonderful ways in which it was different - up until 1965, from what any other race ever produced in human history."

I hate to agree with Gonzo but that was kind of a a dumb thing to say. Not to mention it's historically incorrect. Where is the evidence that shows the founders of this nation intended it to be an all white nation?

Since the creation of this nation blacks and others have had a great deal of influence on all aspects of our culture.

That being said....to currently oppose illegal immigration is not racist. Most anti-illegal immigrationists care not what the color or race of an individual who comes here illegally is but are much more concerned with the illegal entry, the drain on our system they represent and the outright disrespect and hostility they exhibit toward american culture and it's legal citizens.

seems like Richard has some kind of pigment problem

Indeed. Someone bleached his brain a bright shade of Racist.

Dave

I see both sides of this argument for the wall, so won't offer my thoughts on it. However, what Mexico says is moot with that we know of their immigration laws. An American can not work there, draw public benefits, or ever own land.

lono,

An American can not work there, draw public benefits, or ever own land.

Not true on any count.

I am an American born in Mexico, with dual citizenship. I was born there because my parents were living in Mexico while my father ran the business he owned on the Gulf coast of Tabasco state.

We lived there for many years, and owned property as well.

There are some restrictions on land ownership, (primarily in the coastal areas, where even Mexicans cannot own property on the beach) but, as it says on this website, MEXonline:

CAN FOREIGNERS REALLY OWN PROPERTY IN MEXICO?
Yes, Americans and other foreigners may obtain direct ownership of property in the interior of Mexico. However, under Mexican law, foreigners cannot own property outright within the restricted zone. Instead, a real estate trust must be set up to hold title for the foreigner.

This website, Mexperience, defines the conditions under which foreigners may receive state benefits in Mexico:

There are two kinds of permit: Non-Immigrant and Immigrant:

* Non Immigrant Permits are for people who intend to visit Mexico for a specific purpose and then depart.
* Immigrant Permits are for people who wish to live in Mexico, short or long term.

You do not have to surrender your natural Citizenship to be granted full resident status in Mexico. Full resident status entitles you to all rights and benefits of a Mexican National (live, work, claim state benefits and to pay taxes) but you cannot vote in Mexican elections. These permits may also prohibit work in specific industries. These are limited, and relate to bar and waiter/waitress work.

Psst, Ruvy (at #6 here and also noticed elsewhere): if SFC SKI is still an SFC, then he's NOT a First Sergeant. Sergeant First Class and First Sergeant are not the same rank. (I'm assuming a)it's US Army rank we're discussing; b)the US Army rank-structure hasn't changed since my days in uniform; and c)that SFC SKI is a male. If any of those assumptions is incorrect, I apologize.)

I believe Ms. Liberty was molded after the classical Greek model, according to her profile, costume, & the sculptor's classical training. America was not intended for whites only, but it should be "LEGALS ONLY". Anybody who comes here legally, who takes the trouble to file the papers, get investigated, etc., is WELCOME with open arms, & I love the incredible new things they bring with them (especially the cuisines & festivals). We'd be a poorer nation without all of it. Think of Little Italies, Chinatowns, Greektowns, Jewish Orthodox neighborhoods, and all the others. It would be SO boring if we were nothing but Yankee whitebread all over. Here in the DC area, we have entire sections of cities that are Korean, Vietnamese, Indian, Persian, Chinese, North African, and I don't even know what all. We have incredible Buddhist temples, Hindu temples, Russian Orthodox churches complete with onion domes, mosques with calling towers and gorgeous calligraphic decoration, & on & on. A wonderful stew. But most of these people are here legally, with all that implies. We do not and never should welcome illegals. I'm getting sick & tired of repeating what even the densest Kennedy-mentality must understand altho they don't admit it: WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? Regardless of their motives for doing so, illegals start right off with an act of blatant disrespect & lawbreaking, and I maintain from just following the news that most of our crime these days stems from illegals as well, as do increasing incidences of hereto-eradicated (in the US, at least) diseases. Regardless of where they come from, ALL illegals should be immediately deported, without appeal or stay, do not pass GO. Repeat illegals should be punished severely. Their spouses and kids should likewise be deported with them. To give kids born of illegal parents automatic citizenship is a travesty, but what else can we expect from this government & politicians except a cowardly travesty of government.

Those that DO apply to enter legally should be rewarded by having the immigration process speeded up. The current process is a farce, slow, cumbersome, carried out by inadequate numbers of personnel usually working with inadequate information systems & computers that are a shame considering the US has some of the best technology in the world. It must be not just frustrating but actually enraging to be someone who has a job in immigration, one person doing the job of what should be 5 or more people, thanks to the idiots in management who keep paring back staffing in order to save money, and end up just costing everybody more. Anyway, that's another rant. My point is, those to take the trouble & have the respect for the US to apply to enter legally should NOT have to go thru the bullshit & drawn out years it currently takes to come in. Possibly we would get more good, qualified immigrants & decrease the number of illegals who could otherwise qualify. In any case, Brodie is full of it, IMO. I wouldn't want to live in a whitebread nation, altho I can understand those nations, like those of Europe, where such uniformity of culture, language, traditions, etc. goes back thousands of years & is part of their overall identity & history - which is not true of the US, an amalgam from the beginning.

MAOZ,

I hurt my back carrying the Torah around and dancing with it (and it was a light Ashkenazi one instead of the heavy Sephardi one). Otherwise, it was a great SimHat Torah.

Now it's no holidays till Hanukkah.

Thank you for the heads up about army ranks. I was alway kind of fuzzy on the enlisted ranks within the category sergeant. Not offence meant, SFC SKI. Unfortunately, me calling you a first seargent will not add to your pay or retirement benefits...

Shavua Tov,
have a good week

Ruvy, refuah shleimah -- Hope your back's feeling better real soon. Shavua Tov to you too.

Gonzo,

My view and the author's, by the way, is a far more accurate one than yours. So long as you have that great big WELCOME sign in New York Harbor, you might as well have open borders and forget about controlling the flood looking to get in. But neither what you nor I say matter in the issue. Lady Liberty will stay and you guys will just have to deal with the consequences.

Have fun!

Ruvy...

it appears you fail to distinguish between LEGAL immigration..which is invited and nurtured, and ILLEGAL crossing of our national borders

that Statue stands for those who want to come here according to our Nation's Rule of Law...NOT CRIMINAL ENTRY

big difference, and i hope pointing this out makes things a bit more clear

again, notice i place some of the onus on those who come here illegally, but the major portion i reserve for the enablers/motivators in our country who violate the Law by HIRING the illegals knowingly for illegal profits

thanks for your input, but i consider it poorly thought out in regards to the applicable Variables

Excelsior?

Ruvy - how much do those things weigh, anyway? And why are they so heavy - a Christian bible usually weighs only a few pounds at most, even the biggest ones, and they have more material in them than the Judaic one, because they include the NT. What accounts for the difference? I've seen one or two, and they aren't printed/written in unusually large letters.

Gonzo,

I understand very clearly the difference between legal and illegal entry into the country. As a Burger King mamager, I had to examine the documents presented to me by potential employees who came from all over the world. There I had to prevent illegal entry. Having studied law for a year, I most assuredly understand the difference between legal and illegal in a generic sense. Finally having saved pur 7 year old cat from execution for being an illegal resident in the absorpion center we lived in in Jerusalem, I understand something about the issue from the point of view of the illegal entrant...

I'm looking at this not from your point of view of what is on the books in the States, but rather the constant advertising of American wealth in the media, combined with what the big WELCOME SIGN in New York Harbor signifies. These are things that go beyond law and legality.

Advertising always does.

Ruvy sez...
*These are things that go beyond law and legality.*

and here is the crux of where we disagree on this Issue

if anything supercedes the Rule of Law, than said Rule becomes a mere suggestions and thus rendered impotent

therefore, nothing supercedes the Rule of Law if the desire is for that systemic to be the main Principle of governance

so, no matter what the "advertising" is, or implies..the Law defines and codifies

all else is bluster, excuses and denial of Responsibility as well as the totality of the Facts on hand

Excelsior?

Side note to Nancy,

I wasn't holding a Bible. I was carrying a Torah scroll; parchment that is rolled up between two wooden handles and in the instant case, covered with two cloth overings and a crown. The Torah scroll was longer than my chest, and I was holding or dancing with it, using my back to carry the weight. Hence the pain...

The Sephardi Torah scrolls are not covered with cloth coverings, but encased in wood and thus weigh more than the Ashkenazi scrolls covered with cloth. So the Sephardi Torah scrolls are heavier.

Gonzo, we do not disagree. We are merely looking at the same issue from two different points of view. I'm not advocating a solution per se, aside from taking down the WELCOME MAT in New York Harbor. And that is not a Solution, it is a change in the Message to the world - two very different things.

You are still stuck with issues of employer greed and a porous border.

#33 -Gee this place is starting to sound like Hebrew School....whats next dradle games???

Wait about month JOM. Then you can enjoy the annual acid throwing contest that Good Christians like you indulge in over Christmas.

I was here for the last spate and expect to be ariund for the next spate...

I'll have a lot less to say this time round (said it all last time) and will be able to watch all you Good Christians calling each other names. Should be lotsa fun...

Hmmmm sorta like what youdo in every post to all the other American "good jews" who dont quit their jobs move to your cat liter box of a country and collect american foodstamps and welfar checks???

It would be SO boring if we were nothing but Yankee whitebread all over.

That's only true for a society that has been dumbed down by corporate consummerism (and public edcation) to a bunch of thrill seekers hooked on instant gratification in pursuit of the most recently perpetuated fads.

The vast, unequaled classical productions of the White Race in Literature, Art, Music, etc. would be perfectly sufficient for a more refined and educated populace than the one we live in, which has been molded by the current Jew-controlled academia and media.

But for that you need an HCD aristocracy, not an LCD democracy.

Richard sez...

*The vast, unequaled classical productions of the White Race in Literature, Art, Music, etc. would be perfectly sufficient for a more refined and educated populace than the one we live in, which has been molded by the current Jew-controlled academia and media.*

and thus exposes, once again..the entire basis for his illogical "rationale"

to Quote Joliet Jake..
"I hate Illinois nazis"

/ignore

nuff said...

Excelsior?

classical is boring. richard, on the other hand, is highly entertaining.

Mexico has all the right to protest against this "wall of shame." it is part of its land as well.

By the way, those ignorants out there, there's no wall between Guatemala and Mexico.

Mexico is a far less developed country than the United States. It and other such states stay underdeveloped, relatively speaking, due to economic might, and when that's not enough, military might, of its imperialist oppressors.

The U.S. insists that such countries, and this of course includes Mexico, open its borders to unrestricted investment and totally open markets. This has been, and is, resisted, but the imperialists have made much progress.

Mexico is a fairly typical case. Imperialists insist on the unfettered flow of capital, and the total right to repatriate capital, in the form of profits. The investment of capital is for the explicit intent of exploiting labor, and the facilitation of such, at a greater rate than they would be able to in their more developed country.

Flooding their markets with cheap agricultural and manufactured products ruins both the small peasant and the petty capitalists, sending members of both into the industries that the imperialists have designated to be their profit platforms.

In general, the defenders of capitalism say that if the workers don't like the exploitation, they can always vote with their feet. But in this case the capitalists have a convenient wall to prevent those workers using their feet. It's called a border.

One reason the capitalists want to invest in these underdeveloped countries is because workers do not have the same rights as those in the more developed countries. The capitalists in the U.S. for instance, also do not always have enough workers in the country that they can exploit sufficiently to make their required, at least desired, profits. They can't always invest in foreign countries. This is when the exploitation must be carried out within the country, like in hotels or on the land that capitalist farmers and ranchers own. In this case, this not so insignificant sector of the capitalist class would like to have workers they can exploit at a higher rate than they can normally get away with.

Such capitalists, part of the larger capitalist class as a whole, need workers that do not have any legal status so they can further exploit them.

It is interesting how these capitalists, not only get THEIR government to make sure this supply of super exploited labor be made sufficiently available, have laws and police to help facilitate the exploitation, but use their mouthpieces of both their political parties, the media and a frenzied middle class to do their bidding.

The first thing that would go toward resolving this problem is to guarantee full residence rights for all immigrants in the United States. The next thing would be to open the boarder to all workers seeking to find work where the working conditions are better.

I'm just about immobilized with laughter after reading Les's first paragraph. It's like he lives in a bizarre fantasy world where the main source of revenue going into Mexico and making it the wealthiest and most rapidly modernizing nation in Central America is NOT the US.

Dave

Les, Les, Les, did the twentieth century teach you nothing?

You're a cheerleader of a failed ideology, get over it. Those evil capitalists made the computer you used to type that idiotic message you just placed into cyberspace. They also own the companies and developed the fiberoptic cable network it traveled over. You're whole hypocritical existence is dependent on the methods they perfected for you.

The world is a better place because of the 'exploitation' for without it those people would be doomed to a short brutish life of abject poverty, war, disease, and starvation just like their parents and grandparents and every generation that preceded them.

The titans of industry have been so good and efficient at making life more comfortable, eradicating disease, providing food, and generally extending life of all people's around the world that one of the planets fastest growing problems is overpopulation.

hey Red - self respecting capitalists don't 'make' - they 'own'...and they are dependent on others who actually do work for what they own

RedTard,

"Those evil capitalists made the computer you used to type that idiotic message you just placed into cyberspace."

Not my computer nor any other that I can think of.

Les

Your computer was made in a state owned factory?

My computer made in state owned factory?

I don't think so but I am sure it was not made by capitalists.

I presume that the capitalist corporation Toshiba paid for at least some of the factory and tooling in China where it was made but I doubt that capitalists would be the ones building the computer.

The workers may not be capitalists but that sure doesn't stop em from cashing those paychecks. They're not going back to the subsistence farm once they've caught a glimpse of the good life. Another victory for capitalists and a good laptop to boot. In a small moral victory for your kind I heard Cuba recently moved into the modern age of the electric rice cooker, congratulations.

"The workers may not be capitalists but that sure doesn't stop em from cashing those paychecks. They're not going back to the subsistence farm once they've caught a glimpse of the good life."

If you're talking about China you must be kidding.

Excerpted from Asia Times Online. November 22, 2006 "US puts squeeze on Vietnamese labor":

These are the very companies that have promised to raise working conditions for desperate workers around the world. Yet they've once again been caught saying one thing to the American people while actively doing the opposite overseas. A letter recently sent to Bush signed by 27 members of the US Congress concerning AmCham's opposition to China's new draft labor law is apropos to AmCham's efforts in Vietnam:

This shameful American corporate lobbying campaign is inconsistent with our country's commitment to promote respect for fundamental worker rights everywhere ... It also discredits the long-professed claims of many US corporate leaders that US companies and investors in China de facto are leading by example, to respect the basic human rights of all Chinese workers and improve their working conditions and living standards.

US and European corporations are constantly bullying countries such as Vietnam with the threat of moving to China unless they clamp down on the labor force. But these very same corporations are using identical scare tactics in China by threatening to move to countries such as Vietnam if the government raises wages or improves working conditions.

This year, when China released the draft of its new labor law extending modest new rights to workers, Keyong Wu, an expert for the British Chambers of Commerce, told a newspaper, "Business is attracted to China not only because of its labor costs but also because of its efficiency. If regulation starts to affect that and flexibility, then companies could turn to India, Pakistan and Southeast Asia."

Les,

A few points about Mexico's recent history and its economy:

The investment of capital is for the explicit intent of exploiting labor, and the facilitation of such, at a greater rate than they would be able to in their more developed country.

You're partially right. Foreigners ARE investing in Mexico in large part because they're seeking cheaper labor. That cheaper labor exists in Mexico is due to the fact that the country is suffering under a crippling unemployment rate, so ANY demand for labor is welcomed.

Mexico's unemployment rate got that way for a number of reasons; for one thing, through most of the 20th century, the ruling party, the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI) instituted stringent protectionist legislation to "protect" domestic industry, with the effect of severely restricting and inhibiting not only foreign imports, but also foreign investment.

This situation lasted until the second half of the century. Then, in the sixties and seventies, a series of US trained economists took over the management of the Mexican economy, and a handful of them were eventually elected president of the republic.

They were modestly successful in opening the ecomomy to foreign investment with the establishment of a duty free zone along the border with the US, and the "maquiladoras" (foreign owned assembly plants) began to operate there. Eventually, American, Asian and European firms were building and operating plants throughout Mexico.

By the sixties, Mexico's economy began to grow rapidly, and the Mexican middle class, hitherto tiny, became the fastest growing in Latin America by the eighties. By the nineties, the Mexican middle class was also the largest in the region.

I said above that those economists were only modestly successful. There were (and are) two reasons for that: the level of corruption and cronyism throughout Mexican government and in its economy is pervasive and crippling to the growth of the economy. Some inroads have been made in controlling the corruption, but there's a lot of work yet to be done.

The second factor limiting the scope of economic growth in Mexico is the birth rate, one of the highest in the world. Mexico is a Catholic country, and most of the population is devout, so attempts to educate them in birth control have met with limited success. The high birth rate, of course, exacerbates the unemployment problem and puts an enormous strain on other elements of their infrastructure, especially education and housing.

In point of fact, measured against other LatAm economies, Mexico is doing quite well.

One reason the capitalists want to invest in these underdeveloped countries is because workers do not have the same rights as those in the more developed countries.

Not true in Mexico. Mexico's labor laws are (and have been since the revolution in the early 20th century) comprehensive and very favorable to the workers. Because of the corruption and cronyism, they're poorly enforced at best, but the government has long given at least lip service to the campesinos, since it was they who launched and won the revoluition.

Interestingly, Mexico's social security system is far more comprehensive and provides much more free medical care to the citizens than the US system.

In short, the Mexican worker class would welcome some more "exploitation". It's better than unemployment.

Oh, and BTW: my computer was made in Round Rock, TX. I'll grant you that a case can be made that Texas isn't really a part of US, but I do consider my computer to be American made (although at least partly of Asian parts).

Les, you think Malaysian teens could make a PC all by themselves from scratch? And who would pay them to build this fine computer of carved wood and fabric?

Dave

"...you think Malaysian teens could make a PC all by themselves from scratch?"

Don't be silly. No teens anywhere could build a PC from scratch. No company, capitalist, or otherwise, builds any computer from scratch.

From the first paragraph of the CIA Factbook on Mexico:

A devaluation of the peso in late 1994 threw Mexico into economic turmoil, triggering the worst recession in over half a century. The nation continues to make an impressive recovery. Ongoing economic and social concerns include low real wages, underemployment for a large segment of the population, inequitable income distribution, and few advancement opportunities for the largely Amerindian population in the impoverished southern states.

Les #55:

All true, except that the CIA seems to ignore the unemployment rate, focusing only on the underemployment.

What's your point?

Clavos #52

"The second factor limiting the scope of economic growth in Mexico is the birth rate, one of the highest in the world. Mexico is a Catholic country, and most of the population is devout, so attempts to educate them in birth control have met with limited success. The high birth rate, of course, exacerbates the unemployment problem and puts an enormous strain on other elements of their infrastructure, especially education and housing."

From Wickpedia:

"Another indicator of fertility is frequently used: the total fertility rate-- average number of children born to each woman over the course of her life. In general, the total fertility rate is a better indicator of (current) fertility rates because unlike the crude birth rate it is not affected by the age distribution of the population."

Mexico's fertility rate is 2.42 and is ranked 101 internationally, about the same as other devout Catholic countries like Israel (102), and Greenland (103). The U.S. by the way is (118) at 2.09.

Don't be silly. No teens anywhere could build a PC from scratch. No company, capitalist, or otherwise, builds any computer from scratch.

Exactly, so the workers CANNOT control the means of production if you want production to continue.

Dave

"...workers CANNOT control the means of production if you want production to continue."

How on earth does this follow from neither teens nor corporations build computers from scratch?

It follows from your comment that:

I don't think so but I am sure it was not made by capitalists.

Implying that the non-capitalists who assemble the components in some way 'make' the computer which is certainly not true in a modern post-industrial situaton.

Dave

Les,

Although Wikipedia's point about fertility rate versus birth rate is valid in a general sense; in the specific instance of Mexico, which has a median population age of 25.3 years (26.2 for females), the birth rate carries much more weight, because so much of the population is of child bearing age.

Mexico's birth rate is 20.69/1,000 population, which ranks it at # 103 in the world. The US birth rate is 14.14, ranking it # 156.

Were it not for Mexico's high net migration rate of -4.32/1,000; and its relatively high infant mortality rate of 20.26 deaths/1,000 live births (US 6.43/1,000), their population problems would be even worse than they are.

Viewed from another perspective; in 1946, I joined approximately 23.2 million other Mexicans; today, Mexico's population is estimated at 107.5 million -- a more than fourfold increase. By contrast, US population went from 140.1 million in 1946 to 300 million today -- just more than a twofold net gain in population.

I stand by my original point.

(Facts are from CIA World Fact Book, US Census Bureau, and Secretaria de Gobernación/Consejo Nacional de Población, MEX.)

"Implying that the non-capitalists who assemble the components in some way 'make' the computer which is certainly not true in a modern post-industrial situaton."

Workers make the whole computer, every part of it and are the ones who assemble, test and ship it. They are the ones that write the software, debug, integrate and maintain it.

So, what do the capitalists do? I will give you a couple examples that I know of.

I have been working with computers since 1962 so I was quite familiar with them by the time the IBM PC came around. I was familiar with some of the major players. I was familiar with Bill Gates before the Microsoft days and personally discussed with him the founding of Microsoft. I have dealt directly with Don Estridge when he was president of the PC division of IBM and also with top programmers at Microsoft. I worked for IBM 65 and 66. In 71 was one of three that designed one of the first, outside IBM, an interface to the IBM 360 Multiplexer Channel, first customers being Yale Nuclear Instrumentation Labs and the CIA. I made suitable for production an MIT grad project that became the basis for employing 150 people. I used Intel chips as primary parts in digital signal processor before they came out with the 4004. I designed one of the first raster scan graphics systems for the U.S. Air Force. Later was Principal Engineer at DEC. These are some of my credentials. I do know something about the design, marketing and manufacturing of computers, their peripherals and software.

While working at one company I was using an early version of 123 from Lotus that only worked under DOS and with the color graphics adaptor of the early IBM PC. I complained that I would rather that 123 would also work with the popular monochrome card put out by Hercules. My boss contacted his neighbor Mitch Kapor and asked him if a port was feasible. He explained that 123 was written in assembly directly to the IBM CGA and porting would be very difficult. My boss told me this. In a few days I came up with what I thought were compelling business reasons why the port would be worth the effort. He went back to Mitch and a beta was delivered sometime later; it worked.

I called Compaq Computer in its early days and Rod Canion answered the phone. We talked about the design for some time. He said their idea was very simple, just make it so all software that ran on the IBM PC would also run on the Compaq. The way this was to be done was to write a new BIOS that would be totally compatible with the IBM PC hardware. The test was to plug their new BIOS chip into an IBM PC motherboard. They did that until it was perfected.

I have been fairly close to and in some cases influenced capitalist's decisions. I was never anything other than a worker, albeit sometimes quite highly paid.

Workers can control the means of production and continue production.

so much intelligence flushed with an overture of profanity.

I think it's important not to view any of this from a racist angle but from an ethical point of view.

How many Mexicans genuinely need asylum in the United States? Not many would be my guess.

Most countries have closed borders for a reason. That reason is to have some controls on immigration, for reasons that should obvious. The need to control numbers is the main one.

Plus, there are queues of people waiting to get into countries like the US, Canada, Australia, Britain, New Zealand etc.

Just turning up on the doorstop is queue jumping - unless you are genuinely seeking asylum as a refugee or an at-risk person. In those cases, our countries should admit as many people as is humanly possible.

However, to deter queue jumpers. I say build the wall, and let people take the legal path.

Or do what we do here: keep illegal immigrants in detention until their cases can be reviewed. Let the genuine ones stay, and send the others home. A desperate desire to make money and buy a car shouldn't be validated as a reason for granting asylum.

Failing that, stay in Mexico (or wherever else)and work hard to give their own future generations the kind of life they want to have now in the US.

Dave wrote: "Les, you think Malaysian teens could make a PC all by themselves from scratch? And who would pay them to build this fine computer of carved wood and fabric?"

Actually, Dave, this country has plenty of Malay Chinese. So yes, knowing what I know about them, I do think they could build a PC from scratch.

We have selective High Schools in Australia where you have to achieve very high marks to get in. Of course, most of the students (the figure is around 90 per cent in some schools) are of Asian background.

Malaysia is not a backward place. I have been there on a number of occasions for work, including Government business and any notion I had of it being backward was dispelled pretty quickly. Kuala Lumpur is an interesting city and very modern these days - as is its powerhouse neighbour, Singapore.

Singapore, in fact, is a great example of how China might become when it gets enough money (and the will) to modernise totally.

On a totally unrelated note: Singapore noodles are also another of my favourite Asian dishes. I don't mind a really, bloody good Malaysian chicken or prawn laksa, either, with plenty of ringer-stinger chilli.

They deserve congratulations for this alone.