It all begins so normally. Down at the factory, any factory, a few hundred assembly line and maintenance employees are given a round of pink slips. Sad as it is to see all of these people losing their jobs, big layoffs are a fact of life. Those not working at the factory wonder if the company in question is moving out of town or going out of business. Their questions are answered a few days later when scores of newcomers show up and begin operating the same machines and mopping the same floors that their neighbors had just before.
These newcomers are very difficult to communicate with, and choose not to mix with the community at large. Instead, they form their own cliques, and when they have enough money, buy rows of houses in dirt cheap and high risk parts of town. There, they form their own community, and while cliques are still cliques, the newcomers have a sort of mutual territorial bond. Meanwhile, the men and women laid off are roaming the streets in search of new occupations. Ultimately, some work menial jobs for minimum wage, others apply for public assistance, and a few leave the city where they were more than likely born and raised to find what they lost.
At the factory, things are going swell. The bosses are making more money than ever before and the workers are earning far less than their predecessors did. Strangely enough, both bourgeoisie and proletariat alike are just fine with this arrangement. Why? Because the bosses' hires are undocumented, which means that they cannot be monitored by local, state, or federal labor agencies. Consequently, they are paid salaries far beneath the minimum wage. The illegals could care less as what they earn in America is still preferable to what passes for compensation back home. The company officers worry from time to time about the possibility of being caught, but are secure in the knowledge that none of their workers would dare turn themselves in.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Glenn Contrarian
Joseph -
I expected better of you.
I showed you in my immediate comment on your first article how you were falling afoul of a logical fallacy, your claims were over-the-top, and how draconian illegal-immigrant laws are doing significant damage to the economy of Alabama (which examples would likely apply to any other state with a similar law on the books).
Did you defend your article? No. Instead you continued on as if there had been no critical issues with your first article at all. Instead, you submitted an article postulating that that illegal aliens are somehow to blame for the layoffs at our factories. Are they somehow more of a threat to our manufacturing base than our tax laws that encourage businesses to relocate their factories oversea?
The problem isn't that the illegals started working in our factories - the problem is that tens of thousands of our factories were relocated out of our country altogether! You CANNOT blame illegal aliens for that - the very accusation would be ridiculous on its face!
You've done so much better before - but your two articles thus far in this series are something I'd expect from Warren, but not you.
2 - roger nowosielski
A prime example of ideology at work, Glenn. Joseph can't accept the possibility that there's something wrong with America, so he must come up with a ready-made excuse: it's the damn illegals.
3 - Glenn Contrarian
Joseph -
Are you even aware that Obama has deported record numbers of illegal immigrants, or that since the beginning of the Great Recession, illegal immigration is down despite the drug war going on down there?
4 - Joseph Cotto
An important message to all concerned readers,
During my previous series of articles, I intended to make it clear that responding to individual comments would be, essentially, fruitless until every last chapter had been published. What one might perceive as a rational fallacy or inaccurate discernment of fact might not necessarily be so. This is because, unlike in a standalone piece, a series builds in content, and that which seemed peculiar the day before will probably be explained not too long after.
I still welcome anyone's opinion, or opinions, on this series as it unfolds, but would ask that readers not jump to conclusions or expect that every claim presented be addressed within the same article. By the series' end, what appeared puzzling, or even nonsensical, more than likely will not; agree or disagree with my views.
Thank you for your interest and understanding,
Joseph F. Cotto
5 - Glenn Contrarian
For the sake of the more sensible articles you've written, I will wait...but I really don't see how you're going to prove that illegal immigrants are the greatest danger America has ever faced.
6 - troll
ending a series with 'just kidding about those exaggerated statements by the way' and requesting a pass in the mean time doesn't cut it imo...you might consider starting your series with an abstract
7 - roger nowosielski
Just about the only thing that might turn it around, unless Cotto is a magician.
And Glenn, it would really be refreshing if just once you wouldn't feel compel to bring the Democratic party to bear on the issue and respond instead just like a human being.
On a side note, I watched El Norte last night on Hulu Plus. Joseph must have forgotten his humble beginnings (everyone comes originally from somewhere else), or in any case, it would serve him well to watch that movie to remind him of it.
There goes the passionate conservative we have all thought him to be. Would a Rockefeller Republican point to immigration as this country's chief economic problem?
Just asking.
8 - troll
for example - I appreciate how Roger started his series clearly stating how he will show that it is possessive individualism (not just any individualism) that is the root of modern liberalism
...although I'm a bit lost in that series at this point
9 - roger nowosielski
I'd appreciate, troll, some feedback on this, to help me through the maze. Anarcissie doesn't want to touch it with a ten-foot pole (haha), Cindy has her own reasons, so there's no one left.
10 - troll
(Jose - please excuse the side comments here...Roger - as my early comment in your series indicates I'm not comfortable with the ontological reduction that you are using (see here heterochromatic's comments on TD)...a sympathetic reading of Hayek's admittedly dated Individualism: True and False might give you some inspiration)
11 - roger nowosielski
thanx. Sorry, Joseph.
12 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger -
So...you would have been comfortable with "America has deported a record number of immigrants in the past three years" but not comfortable with "Obama has deported a record number of immigrants"?
13 - roger nowosielski
Forget it. It's a waste of breath talking to you.
14 - Glenn Contrarian
Ah. So you see your error, but your pride will not let you admit it. You're welcome, Roger.
15 - Clavos
America has deported a record number of immigrants in the past three years...
They are not immigrants; they are law breakers who sneaked across the border illegally to get here. They are temporary residents and fugitives from the law; to call them immigrants is to cheapen and degrade the many millions who awaited their turn and came here in accordance with the law.
Deportation is what they deserve; but not until after they've paid whatever penalty the law prescribes for their unlawful actions.
16 - Cannonshop
#1 Glenn, I didn't get that meaning at all from Mr. Cotto's article-he's talking about something you OUGHT to be concerned about-Corporate Malfeasance and Greed, and how they get away with both screwing their old employees, AND exploiting the everloving shit out of people who're desperate and in a bad place.
Read it for Content, Glenn-the malfeasance, the crime, originates not with the "Illegals", they're just victims here with no recourse to the law (being as they are, by definition, breaking it-and the scumbag corporates KNOW this...)
The "employers" running these scams, now, they really ARE the "Greedy corrupt corporate raiders" you Democrats are always up in arms about.
He's detailing a pattern of exploitation and abuse here, one that impacts communities as well as the immediate victims. He's describing the MECHANISM, Glenn.
17 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
In my experience, I'm a lot safer in a community of illegal immigrants than I am walking in the inner city or even in small towns at night. Why? Because illegal immigrants usually try their best to stay out of trouble and - if you'll check out the reference I gave above about Alabama - they contribute quite a bit to our economy.
I've heard the same oh-so-patriotic line that you used many times before (but not by you), and the more I think about it, the more that line doesn't wash...because it's been several times that I've seen BC conservatives on here cynically pooh-pooh patriotism as if 'patriotism' was only important when they thought it was important.
Now look at Cannonshop's reply - he might have something there. But spare me the sanctimony - I've got enough of that and to spare.
18 - Glenn Contrarian
Cannonshop -
Perhaps. That's definitely a maybe. But how that would explain his line that illegal aliens are the worst danger that have ever faced America, that's something I've just got to see.
19 - Zingzing
Clavos, an immigrant is one who immigrates. Your judgment doesn't mean anything. Especially when you would call them "wetbacks". Still flabbergasted a that one.
20 - Zingzing
T, nazi.
21 - troll
#16 - while the content of this series is important as you say (and so was that of Cotto's last series) style is also...if he continues to use the format to spout exaggerated and somewhat bizarre statements as he did in his last he will become as difficult to take seriously as is our good Warren
22 - Clavos
Glenn:
My comment has nothing to do with "patriotism," an emotion I disdain, but everything to do with the fact that the USA is a nation of laws. You say, "spare me the sanctimony." Now that's rich. To paraphrase Herbert Morrison, "Oh the irony!"
And zing, I know 'em far better than you; I am one. The term wetback originated as one of pride, and it remains that among those to whom it is applied. And an immigrant is "one who immigrates," you are correct. However how one immigrates is relevant here, so "illegal immigrant" is more applicable, and serves to distinguish them from those who came here abiding by the law instead of coming in as criminals.
23 - Zingzing
Clavos, you can claim to be this, you can claim to be that, you can claim an immigrant isn't an immigrant and that mexicans like being called wetbacks, and that may all be very convenient for you, but it doesn't mean I will take your word for it. And I don't know that you do know "far better" than me at this point. Are you saying you're an illegal immigrant? You're so many things at this point, you may have forgotten what "you" is.
24 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
HAH! Mr. Cynicism himself is telling us the U.S. is a 'nation of laws'. HAH! Mr. "I disdain patriotism" tells us about how Americans are supposed to be 'law-abiding'. HAH! 'Scuse me? Did we at some point morph into Beaver-Cleaver families with "Father Knows Best" husbands and Stepford wives?
Yes, I said 'spare me the sanctimony' - at least I admit the irony - look at the comment! - but you apparently don't even see the vast irony in your own comments! What's absolutely incredible to me is the selective use you make of your vaunted cynicism. Frankly, it's starting to look like I'm more of a cynic than you!
25 - Dr Dreadful
While we're broadly on the subject, I was just trying to figure out who "Dale Un" is in the banner ad at the top of this article, and what he has to do with Snickers. Then I realized that the ad's in Spanish.