The illegal immigration might not be confined to the US but some parts are. When I first moved to California in 1961, we had a program known as the Bracero Program by which migrant workers, primarily from Mexico entered California, legally to work the crops - usually from March to October. They came because even though they earned crappy wages here it was more than they could earn in Mexico. Now I am a liberal progressive but some of my cohorts are dumb as door nails.
Because this was a temporary (although annual workforce) Labor 'bosses' cropped up to hire these people in Mexico and put them to work o farms. The majority of the labor bosses were Hispanic. They treated the laborers like animals - even worse. They lived in squalid housing, they had insufficient water in the fields and some died of heat stroke.
Okay that is pretty disgusting, but instead of getting help for these people, the got rid of the bracero program. DUMB
We still needed agricultural workers and Americans weren't willing to work the long hours under the scorching California sun for shitty wages. On the other hand the bigots in Congress weren't willing to change the rules to allow more Hispanic laborers in to the Country. So we were flooded by undocumented people crossing the border. Some followed the old bracero rules and returned to Mexico after harvest, but many stayed and started or worked for landscaping firms, housekeeping firms, hotel/motel maids, etc.
Yes a few drug dealers and human traffickers moved in too. But these were numerically fewer (by far) than those who came to work.
Trump is known to have hired countless numbers of undocumented immigrants for his hotels, casinos, and golf courses. Many other ultra wealthy did the same.
There is more than enough blame to go around - farmers, clothing makers, meat packers, to name a few businesses, Bigots, in general. L:aw makers for refusing to address immigration for ore than 50 years. Take your pick.
You make a valid point, and indeed one that has its special "American aspects", although even in the EU we have the problem of seasonal workers from Poland, Romania and the likes, although that does receive special legislative consideration (the UK is now an issue after Brexit).
People just don't illegally migrate to sell drugs. Believe me. What happens, and has now developed due to administrative incompetence, is that some of those who do come for legit reasons fall on hard times. A minor offence that puts them in prison effectively puts them into a university of crime. "Why do you want to pick peaches when you can sell cocaine?" They get contacts to organisations, and bad leads to worse. It is not people fresh across the border who do this, it is established networks, fed by a need that is pumped up by prohibition (just like alcohol was), and designed to function as a parallel economy (I'll say no more, leave it there). Drug-running, in short, is a pretext. Very, very few "reasons" cited for policy are much more than pretext. I think there probably was a dire need for electricity when the Hoover Dam was built. That'll be the last "reason".
I have spoken to others on Substack about how it comes that undocumented immigrants end up paying taxes in the US. And what you say goes some way to sketch out the background to that. Thank you.
HOWEVER, having answered your points, I again have to complain: mentioning the word "immigration" sets off a cluster bomb of little explosions in all directions. The article is about one act of the Illinois legislature, dealing with conduct that can found a claim in damages REGARDLESS of the immigration status of the claimant. The law has got NOTHING to do with the actual status of the parties, or with whether they are immigrants legally or illegally. Nothing in that matters in this case. Has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUESTION.
And, separately, who the ICE deports has nothing at all to do with any action taken in terms of the act. The two are utterly and entirely separate.
The illegal immigration might not be confined to the US but some parts are. When I first moved to California in 1961, we had a program known as the Bracero Program by which migrant workers, primarily from Mexico entered California, legally to work the crops - usually from March to October. They came because even though they earned crappy wages here it was more than they could earn in Mexico. Now I am a liberal progressive but some of my cohorts are dumb as door nails.
Because this was a temporary (although annual workforce) Labor 'bosses' cropped up to hire these people in Mexico and put them to work o farms. The majority of the labor bosses were Hispanic. They treated the laborers like animals - even worse. They lived in squalid housing, they had insufficient water in the fields and some died of heat stroke.
Okay that is pretty disgusting, but instead of getting help for these people, the got rid of the bracero program. DUMB
We still needed agricultural workers and Americans weren't willing to work the long hours under the scorching California sun for shitty wages. On the other hand the bigots in Congress weren't willing to change the rules to allow more Hispanic laborers in to the Country. So we were flooded by undocumented people crossing the border. Some followed the old bracero rules and returned to Mexico after harvest, but many stayed and started or worked for landscaping firms, housekeeping firms, hotel/motel maids, etc.
Yes a few drug dealers and human traffickers moved in too. But these were numerically fewer (by far) than those who came to work.
Trump is known to have hired countless numbers of undocumented immigrants for his hotels, casinos, and golf courses. Many other ultra wealthy did the same.
There is more than enough blame to go around - farmers, clothing makers, meat packers, to name a few businesses, Bigots, in general. L:aw makers for refusing to address immigration for ore than 50 years. Take your pick.
You make a valid point, and indeed one that has its special "American aspects", although even in the EU we have the problem of seasonal workers from Poland, Romania and the likes, although that does receive special legislative consideration (the UK is now an issue after Brexit).
People just don't illegally migrate to sell drugs. Believe me. What happens, and has now developed due to administrative incompetence, is that some of those who do come for legit reasons fall on hard times. A minor offence that puts them in prison effectively puts them into a university of crime. "Why do you want to pick peaches when you can sell cocaine?" They get contacts to organisations, and bad leads to worse. It is not people fresh across the border who do this, it is established networks, fed by a need that is pumped up by prohibition (just like alcohol was), and designed to function as a parallel economy (I'll say no more, leave it there). Drug-running, in short, is a pretext. Very, very few "reasons" cited for policy are much more than pretext. I think there probably was a dire need for electricity when the Hoover Dam was built. That'll be the last "reason".
I have spoken to others on Substack about how it comes that undocumented immigrants end up paying taxes in the US. And what you say goes some way to sketch out the background to that. Thank you.
HOWEVER, having answered your points, I again have to complain: mentioning the word "immigration" sets off a cluster bomb of little explosions in all directions. The article is about one act of the Illinois legislature, dealing with conduct that can found a claim in damages REGARDLESS of the immigration status of the claimant. The law has got NOTHING to do with the actual status of the parties, or with whether they are immigrants legally or illegally. Nothing in that matters in this case. Has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUESTION.
And, separately, who the ICE deports has nothing at all to do with any action taken in terms of the act. The two are utterly and entirely separate.