Advocates of harsh immigration laws and policies continue to fail to see the benefits immigrants(legal or illegal) bring and without them they readily dismiss the economic penalties imposed on local governments and business. Two arguments central to the debate include illegal immigrants are taking jobs Americans want and need and that insuring only US citizens can utilize state services.
The first argument is almost a joke and if wasn't for over 50% of Americans not being able to get out of high school this would not be up for discussion. Georgia has one of the harshest anti-immigration laws on the books and it also has one of the highest unemployment and lowest high school graduation rates which makes it fertile ground for stewing hate and condemn a whole ethnic group. Georgia unemployment has not changed since trying to run out illegal immigrants but what has occurred are jobs no one willing to fill. Three reasons for this exist; lack of training for desired jobs, Georgians not really interested (not capable) in doing the type of work illegals perform and the unemployment generosity of the government sucks out any incentive to work. Initially when Georgia enacted its first round of anti-immigration laws farmers were left empty handed when it came to hard manual labor usually performed by illegal immigrants. Georgia officials came to rescue but no one showed up until they bussed in prisoners to do the work. They lasted less than one week. OK who wants to do manual farm work anyway. But what about construction jobs. Prior to the recession in 2008 I can not tell you how many white, tobacco chewing, overweight, uneducated, white men Georgia officials paraded in front of TV cameras in commercials and announcements deriding illegals for taking what were once high paying construction jobs. Please note that the high flying build out of America prior to the recession would have been possible without the low cost labor brought in from Mexico and other countries.
Fast forward to June 2013 prior to passage of the new immigration reform bill and the far right has a new argument supporting Americans not taking jobs once performed by illegals. After driving out many illegals over the last 4 years America is left with no workers and certainly no young workers to perform much of the work. With mounting evidence Americans will not perform many jobs illegals once performed for example manual farm labor, due to of difficulty is all wrong. The new argument is "The pay is not sufficient". The new argument suggest if pay was high enough American would perform the work. Illegals drove the price down so low Americans will not work for such depressed wages. The right sure gives illegals a lot of credit and sway over our economy. As long as America fails to take responsibility for their presence the problem will never be solved. As long as America refuses to have dialogue with Mexican Americans over Hispanic issue the problem will never be solved. As long as the right believes all illegals once naturalized with vote Democratic. They fail to understand Russians, Irish, Canadians, and other non-Hispanics are here illegally as well in very large numbers. Texas and Arizona both boasts large Hispanic populations but yet Republicans win the governor's mansion. If the right really understand they would focus on the 50% of legal Hispanics that do not vote and convert them and not worry about voters that will not be eligible for at least 10 years or two almost three presidential election cycles.
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Immigration Deal is Modern-day Slave Labor
The "gang of Eight" is set to make an immigration deal.
The deal is mostly about Mexicans crossing the border illegally and the 11 million already here again mostly Mexican. Yet interesting enough or least a factoid there is not one Mexican American, largest ethnic group in the country, in the bunch. Most of our Hispanic leaders, at least politically, are not Mexican descent either. In this group we have a Cuba born and a Puerto Rican senator. How many Puerto Ricans have immigration issues and are struggling to get into this country. With all due respect to our Puerto Rican brothers they do not have the first clue what it means to live in fear having the most powerful country in the world hunting you down separating you from your family to expel you after living in this country as a contributor for 10 plus years. Why are there not any Mexican Americans at the table? Not even one worker is represented. And make no mistake this is a work agreement not an immigration agreement. It s is a way to secure cheap labor for this country for now and in the future. Currently 10,000 Americans per day turn 65.
This deal is not really about providing a path to citizenship to the estimated 11 million undocumented. It is more about this country exercising basic economics by taking advantage of cheap labor from south of the border. What this agreement seeks is cheap uneducated and unskilled labor with employers never having to provide any tangible benefits to the workers - modern day slave labor. Even the unions have objected to any undocumented worker (or Mexican worker) having any rights to advance or bring any skill sets to perform electrical work or drive heavy equipment. Most groups and individuals working on the immigration agreement, including the gang of eight, will only agree to move this forward if only uneducated and unskilled labor is allowed. The US needs a labor pool they can give "the most dangerous, dirtiest, back breaking, with no potential to advance jobs that no one in their right mind would ever dream of doing" to. After the country's last purge attempt of Mexican labor it did prove many Americans are not willing to work and certainly will not work at the jobs most Mexicans are willing to do. As an example, labor shortages are being blamed from keeping the construction market from expanding. Why with unemployment still north of 7% in most states? Construction was a predominately Hispanic labor market paraded in front of TV cameras by anti-immigrant hate groups as a job killer for Americans. Now there is a shortage! Who is going to pick tomatoes, cherries, apples, cucumbers, etc.?
Most Americans have no idea the mistreatment farm workers have received in this country for the purpose of providing our dinner tables low cost meats, fruits and vegetables. Many families live crowded in one room shacks on blocks with no running water or indoor plumbing of any kind. Child labor laws are thrown out the window. One does not have to go to Africa or the far east to lobby against child labor and cruelty just look to our farms and food processors. Educating their children is seen as burden to American taxpayers with many states passing local legislation preventing children of illegals from attending school under the guise of protecting our children and our education resources. Although illegals pay taxes they receive no representation. There is something fundamentally wrong denying children an education regardless of the circumstances.
Since most Americans are blind to the squalor farm workers live in our new immigration agreement will allow, if passed, for more people to live like this. Heaven forbid we ask Americans to do this work. Georgia tried this approach and finally tried prison labor paying them a fare rate and they quit. Because the work is hard, it is hot when performed, and it is required every day 10 hours per day. Crops do not wait to be picked, When they are ready they must be picked. Our new immigration agreement will insure 21st century slavery with the farms acting as modern day plantations. The color of the skin is close enough.
I wonder what Congress will do to make sure only uneducated and unskilled workers are allowed. What kind of test do you give to someone to prove they are to dumb to not want to advance their lives and that of their families. How does someone design a test so only untalented people with no desire to advance to drive heavy equipment or install electrical wire are allowed to enter our great nation that promises the American dream to any one that works hard and advances? I guess we are going to have to add an asterisk. Is it fair for our country to fight for human rights and human dignity when we us the power of out government to repress a whole class of workers through an immigration agreement? It is fair for our country to work in far away lands to educate and pull people out of poverty and then create laws through an immigration agreement designed to keep an underclass under and an uneducated class uneducated? What do you think?
The deal is mostly about Mexicans crossing the border illegally and the 11 million already here again mostly Mexican. Yet interesting enough or least a factoid there is not one Mexican American, largest ethnic group in the country, in the bunch. Most of our Hispanic leaders, at least politically, are not Mexican descent either. In this group we have a Cuba born and a Puerto Rican senator. How many Puerto Ricans have immigration issues and are struggling to get into this country. With all due respect to our Puerto Rican brothers they do not have the first clue what it means to live in fear having the most powerful country in the world hunting you down separating you from your family to expel you after living in this country as a contributor for 10 plus years. Why are there not any Mexican Americans at the table? Not even one worker is represented. And make no mistake this is a work agreement not an immigration agreement. It s is a way to secure cheap labor for this country for now and in the future. Currently 10,000 Americans per day turn 65.
This deal is not really about providing a path to citizenship to the estimated 11 million undocumented. It is more about this country exercising basic economics by taking advantage of cheap labor from south of the border. What this agreement seeks is cheap uneducated and unskilled labor with employers never having to provide any tangible benefits to the workers - modern day slave labor. Even the unions have objected to any undocumented worker (or Mexican worker) having any rights to advance or bring any skill sets to perform electrical work or drive heavy equipment. Most groups and individuals working on the immigration agreement, including the gang of eight, will only agree to move this forward if only uneducated and unskilled labor is allowed. The US needs a labor pool they can give "the most dangerous, dirtiest, back breaking, with no potential to advance jobs that no one in their right mind would ever dream of doing" to. After the country's last purge attempt of Mexican labor it did prove many Americans are not willing to work and certainly will not work at the jobs most Mexicans are willing to do. As an example, labor shortages are being blamed from keeping the construction market from expanding. Why with unemployment still north of 7% in most states? Construction was a predominately Hispanic labor market paraded in front of TV cameras by anti-immigrant hate groups as a job killer for Americans. Now there is a shortage! Who is going to pick tomatoes, cherries, apples, cucumbers, etc.?
Most Americans have no idea the mistreatment farm workers have received in this country for the purpose of providing our dinner tables low cost meats, fruits and vegetables. Many families live crowded in one room shacks on blocks with no running water or indoor plumbing of any kind. Child labor laws are thrown out the window. One does not have to go to Africa or the far east to lobby against child labor and cruelty just look to our farms and food processors. Educating their children is seen as burden to American taxpayers with many states passing local legislation preventing children of illegals from attending school under the guise of protecting our children and our education resources. Although illegals pay taxes they receive no representation. There is something fundamentally wrong denying children an education regardless of the circumstances.
Since most Americans are blind to the squalor farm workers live in our new immigration agreement will allow, if passed, for more people to live like this. Heaven forbid we ask Americans to do this work. Georgia tried this approach and finally tried prison labor paying them a fare rate and they quit. Because the work is hard, it is hot when performed, and it is required every day 10 hours per day. Crops do not wait to be picked, When they are ready they must be picked. Our new immigration agreement will insure 21st century slavery with the farms acting as modern day plantations. The color of the skin is close enough.
I wonder what Congress will do to make sure only uneducated and unskilled workers are allowed. What kind of test do you give to someone to prove they are to dumb to not want to advance their lives and that of their families. How does someone design a test so only untalented people with no desire to advance to drive heavy equipment or install electrical wire are allowed to enter our great nation that promises the American dream to any one that works hard and advances? I guess we are going to have to add an asterisk. Is it fair for our country to fight for human rights and human dignity when we us the power of out government to repress a whole class of workers through an immigration agreement? It is fair for our country to work in far away lands to educate and pull people out of poverty and then create laws through an immigration agreement designed to keep an underclass under and an uneducated class uneducated? What do you think?
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Sand Hook Elementary School Massacre - The Wrong Debate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting | |
|---|---|
 Police arrive in front of the elementary school after the shooting. | |
| Location | Newtown, Connecticut, United States |
| Coordinates | 41°25′12″N 73°16′43″WCoordinates: 41°25′12″N 73°16′43″W[1] |
| Date | December 14, 2012 c. 9:35 am – c. 9:49 am[2][3] (EST) |
| Target | Students and staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School |
| Attack type | School shooting, murder–suicide,matricide, spree shooting |
| Deaths | 28 total; 27 at the school (including perpetrator) and perpetrator's mother (at home)[4][5] |
| Injured | 2[6] |
| Perpetrator | Adam Peter Lanza[7][8] |
I found this on Wikipedia:
On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza, 20, 
fatally shot twenty children and six adult staff members in a mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the village of Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut.[4][5] Before driving to the school, Lanza had shot and killed his mother Nancy at their Newtown home.[7][9][10] As first responders arrived, he committed suicide by shooting himself in the head.
The incident is the second deadliest shooting in American history, after the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre. It is the second-deadliest mass murder at an American elementary school, after the 1927 Bath School bombings in Michigan.[11][12]
The shootings prompted renewed debate about gun control in the United States, and a proposal for new legislation banning the sale and manufacture of certain types of semi-automatic weapons and magazines with more than ten rounds of ammunition.[13
___________________________________________________________________________
As you can read it lead America into the world of gun debate and school safety. How do we protect our children in school? In this country when mainstream media, or frankly all media outlets, are discussed it is usually refers to liberal versus conservative broadcasts. Both the left and right see this as the primary debate. However, this is not the focus of this writing I do want to point out the debate should be focused on how we view news controlled and driven by Euro-Americans (whites) versus minorities and how the coverage negatively affects minority groups. a discussion for a later time. However, this is the case in this cowardly crime.
Immediately after the shooting the whole world wondered how this can happen in America? How can someone massacre children? Experts were paraded on TV trying to profile the killer and then attempting to understand the mind of the killer. The media spent countless hours trying to help America come to terms with the shootings. Everything about the 20 year old was mentioned except for one fact - young white male. Why was this left out of the discussion?
Let's go back over the last 15 years in America and look at the timeline of school killings I pulled up from Fox News Insider: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/12/14/timeline-major-school-shootings-in-the-united-states/
Below is a timeline of some of the major U.S. school shootings:
Chardon, Ohio, February 27, 2012: A student opened fire in a cafeteria at Chardon High School, killing three students and injuring two others before he was arrested. 
Dekalb, Illinois, February 14, 2008: A former graduate student killed five students at Northern Illinois University before killing himself. 
Blacksburg, Virginia, April 16, 2007: A student killed 32 students and faculty at Virginia Polytechnic and State University in the worst single act of gun violence in U.S. history.
Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania, October 2, 2006: An armed dairy truck driver selected the female students at a one-room Amish schoolhouse and shot them execution-style, killing five. The man then shot himself.
Tucson, Arizona, October 29, 2002: A failing student shot and killed three professors and then himself in a rampage at the University of Arizona School of Nursing.
Littleton, Co., April 20, 1999: Two students killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded more than 20 others before killing themselves at Columbine High School. 
Jonesboro, Ark., March 24, 1998: Two boys, ages 11 and 13, fired on their middle school from woods, killing four girls and a teacher and wounding 11 others.
Add Jared Lee Loughner and James Eagan Holmes to the mix and a visible pattern emerges that very few want to discuss. What is wrong with young white males in America?
What is the America white culture that produces this type of toxicity? American readily and easily explains Black and Hispanic shooters: low education, no father figure, etc. But what confuses them about white shooters. Why are we, as a nation, not discussing how to prevent young white males from horrific crimes. Maybe some left better to the white-controlled and dominated media outlets.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Shakespeare got it wrong!
In As You Like It, one of Shakespeare's characters, Jacques, said:
"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages."
Shakespeare was almost right. The world is not a stage it is a sales call. Even a newborn recognizes very quickly that crying outburst bring him food and attention. Any parent that has had children go through the "terrible two's"will testify to the fact that two year olds know that throwing temper tantrums brings rewards (i.e. getting what you want). This is a child's crude way of selling her/his point. This behavior continues throughout our lives as teenagers trying to be accepted, compromising with your parents and teachers, negotiating with your spouse and children and continue until the time we die. We are constantly in sales mode throughout life.
There is not one instance in our lives that we are not negotiating for something from someone. Everything we do in our lives is governed by how well we negotiate (or communicate) our position to get someone to do something for us that we need that they might not otherwise do for us. The problem, however, is that we are poor equipped with the basic selling skills necessary to win most of the negotiations that will be presented during our lifetime.
In all our of relationships business, personal, family, religious, and social we are constantly selling. I use the word "selling" in the sense that if the world is a sales call we are always, by definition, selling. In this competitive world refining and honing your communication skills or selling skills will help you advance in all areas of your life. The next time you are tyring to convince someone to do something or to get you something try using basic selling skills. Learning basic selling skills may help you effectively convey your wishes and have someone act on those desires. And see if this starts changing your life by getting all you ask for out of life.
Remember the world is a sales call.
"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages."
Shakespeare was almost right. The world is not a stage it is a sales call. Even a newborn recognizes very quickly that crying outburst bring him food and attention. Any parent that has had children go through the "terrible two's"will testify to the fact that two year olds know that throwing temper tantrums brings rewards (i.e. getting what you want). This is a child's crude way of selling her/his point. This behavior continues throughout our lives as teenagers trying to be accepted, compromising with your parents and teachers, negotiating with your spouse and children and continue until the time we die. We are constantly in sales mode throughout life.
There is not one instance in our lives that we are not negotiating for something from someone. Everything we do in our lives is governed by how well we negotiate (or communicate) our position to get someone to do something for us that we need that they might not otherwise do for us. The problem, however, is that we are poor equipped with the basic selling skills necessary to win most of the negotiations that will be presented during our lifetime.
In all our of relationships business, personal, family, religious, and social we are constantly selling. I use the word "selling" in the sense that if the world is a sales call we are always, by definition, selling. In this competitive world refining and honing your communication skills or selling skills will help you advance in all areas of your life. The next time you are tyring to convince someone to do something or to get you something try using basic selling skills. Learning basic selling skills may help you effectively convey your wishes and have someone act on those desires. And see if this starts changing your life by getting all you ask for out of life.
Remember the world is a sales call.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Too Big To Fail!
The current and past administrations have and are still using a theory that they believe is a fact that there are certain companies (i.e. enterprises) too big to fail. Their failure would result in catastrophic economic harm across the world. These enterprises include financial institutions, manufacturers, insurance companies and others.
What is the basis of this theory becoming fact? Why is bigger better and is there really any company too big to fail? We have a habit in America to "super size" everything. Big, in our American culture, has always been associated with good, with the exception of weight gain. It is not just french fires and soft drinks but in the early 60's we started to see a transformation to big stuff. As we entered the golden age where everyone could attain upper middle class living the concept of bigger is better became the course de jour for everything. We witnessed audio speakers getting bigger and bigger. Cars and trucks getting bigger. This cultural identity unique to the American perspective started spreading beyond appliances, audio equipment, and cars and soon included houses, schools, malls, airports, buildings.
So here we are with schools that encompass blocks and blocks and house thousands of students pretending that there is some magical financial maneuvering that suggest big is good because it is less expensive. Then we build huge airports where it takes longer to get through to the gate than the trip from your home to the airport. The malls went from local servicing of a community to state and then regional service capability. Wal-Mart ate up small town America because big is good and small is bad. Economies of scale was the battle cry.
We became a nation obsessed with bigger is better and this eventually spilled over to our business culture where we started building bigger and bigger companies. We rationalized it as a war in the competitive battle for global markets. If we are to win this battle big is good. We can be everywhere for everyone providing everything.
Was MCI too big to fail? Was Enron too big to fail? Was American Steel too big to fail? Was Sperry too big to fail? Is GM too big to fail? Is AIG too big to fail? Is Citi too big to fail? Is Fannie Mae too big to fail?
Failure is good. It is the counter balancing effect to capitalism. The fear of failure is what puts the fear of GOD on anyone starting or managing a business. I think the global meltdown has answered my question of is bigger better. And the answer is no. Being bigger did not prevent the meltdown or insulate these large behemoths from drowning in red ink. I think the bigger is better experiment as it relates to capitalism is dead. Big is slow. Small is fast. In complex markets speed to change and adapt is more important than size. Size is a hindrance when speed is a large part of the new market dynamics.
What is the basis of this theory becoming fact? Why is bigger better and is there really any company too big to fail? We have a habit in America to "super size" everything. Big, in our American culture, has always been associated with good, with the exception of weight gain. It is not just french fires and soft drinks but in the early 60's we started to see a transformation to big stuff. As we entered the golden age where everyone could attain upper middle class living the concept of bigger is better became the course de jour for everything. We witnessed audio speakers getting bigger and bigger. Cars and trucks getting bigger. This cultural identity unique to the American perspective started spreading beyond appliances, audio equipment, and cars and soon included houses, schools, malls, airports, buildings.
So here we are with schools that encompass blocks and blocks and house thousands of students pretending that there is some magical financial maneuvering that suggest big is good because it is less expensive. Then we build huge airports where it takes longer to get through to the gate than the trip from your home to the airport. The malls went from local servicing of a community to state and then regional service capability. Wal-Mart ate up small town America because big is good and small is bad. Economies of scale was the battle cry.
We became a nation obsessed with bigger is better and this eventually spilled over to our business culture where we started building bigger and bigger companies. We rationalized it as a war in the competitive battle for global markets. If we are to win this battle big is good. We can be everywhere for everyone providing everything.
Was MCI too big to fail? Was Enron too big to fail? Was American Steel too big to fail? Was Sperry too big to fail? Is GM too big to fail? Is AIG too big to fail? Is Citi too big to fail? Is Fannie Mae too big to fail?
Failure is good. It is the counter balancing effect to capitalism. The fear of failure is what puts the fear of GOD on anyone starting or managing a business. I think the global meltdown has answered my question of is bigger better. And the answer is no. Being bigger did not prevent the meltdown or insulate these large behemoths from drowning in red ink. I think the bigger is better experiment as it relates to capitalism is dead. Big is slow. Small is fast. In complex markets speed to change and adapt is more important than size. Size is a hindrance when speed is a large part of the new market dynamics.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Chavez at it again!
In December of 2007 I wrote a blog called "Watch out for Chavez". A basic wake up call to The US to quit ignoring the politics south of our border. Interesting how we pay more attention to countries literally a world away and ignore our own back yard. At that time Chavez was trying to change the constitution to allow him to serve for life. This failed and at that time Chavez vowed to continue the fight. Fast forward to 2009 and we watch, almost unnoticed, Chavez got one step closer to become a monarch for life by having laws passed to remove presidential term limits effectively keeping him in office until 2021.
If the US does not take him out (or anybody take him out for that matter) we have to deal with a mad "commie" that sells us 40% of our oil requirements. Not only do we make him richer every day we also give him more power over a region we need to protect and defend. With a new administration I hope they pay attention to the affairs a little closer to home.
If the US does not take him out (or anybody take him out for that matter) we have to deal with a mad "commie" that sells us 40% of our oil requirements. Not only do we make him richer every day we also give him more power over a region we need to protect and defend. With a new administration I hope they pay attention to the affairs a little closer to home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)