On Nov 19, 7:40 am, "Sandy" <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message denews:c16ef82a-5253-4030-8ed5-e010e842c9cd@d61g2000hsa.googlegroups.com,
> Bill C <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
> OK, I have read and now wish to offer a personal perspective on several
> points.
>
> 1 - there is an irrational belief that illegal presence is laudable, when
> those who take the required, long, uncertain and costly steps to enter
> legally and obtain work or citizenship are not considered in the equation.
There is no inherent duty to obey The State. If it is in one's best
interests to obey The State, then my advice is to do so. One's duty
is to oneself. That includes accepting jobs where every afternoon is
a training ride on the back of a certain Sonoma County taxpayer.
> 2 - Immigration is not the only goal, and often is not an actual goal, for
> the undocumented. Employment is their objective, for the most part.
Yes.
> 3 - Employment at substandard rates indicates the typical consumer interest
> of obtaining quality for lowe price. Not from the workers' viewpoint - from
> the American consumers'.
What the hell does "substandard" mean? Like you must mean, "lower
than my personal /value judgments/ say it /ought/ to be, and I'm
smarter than others, and I got the votes." Americans are different
than anyone else? Why would any body trade anything if they did not
think they would be better off than before? Just altruism? Well
maybe some people find altruism to be satisfying along with 52" LCD
screens.
> 4 - The effects of illegal immigration is mostly on unskilled and onerous
> work. There are not a lot of illegals working on Wall Street or in the
> Silicon Valley unless they are hauling brooms and mops.
Well that is the biggest story of immigration to the US, legal or
illegal. Sure, there have been many skilled people too.
> 5 - The invisible effect of non-immigration is the emigration of jobs in
> fabrication, manufacturing, reprocessing; I don't see an America that wants
> to continue to work on factory assembly lines. Everyone wants to be a
> manager. There are too many colleges selling too many irrational dreams.
I don't see that "America wants" or "does not want" any such a
things. I think it is rather irrelevent, really. People may or may
not seize the opportunities they actually manage to see. That
opportunities arise is not something people can necessarily control,
or say like: "I will have such and such opportunity!" and it suddenly
comes into being by command.
In my observation, I see that people want to survive, and do it as
comfortably and pleasureably as possible. The upward want is
inevitable, immigrant, subject, or citizen alike. The only question
is what actually happens.
> 6 - America is protectionist, period. No reason to think it embraces world
> trade that doesn't heavily favor American interests. Those interests, in
> practicality, do not represent the personal economic interests of citizens,
> but the financial and meta-financial interests of the largest corporations..
> No, this is not a diatribe against corporate interests, just a reminder of
> where the influence is in creating both policy and law.
Well you know how it goes. Whatever the flaws and capture of
government that exist, the solution is always more government, because
we know, don't we, that the bigger government will always be more
immune to capture than smaller government. Always make government
*more powerful*, that way it has more gifts to give.
But you fail to mention that the basic nature and structure of
government is that it itself grows in power and income. No intention
is necessary for this to happen. Government benefits government
first.
"The solution to bad government, is always more government." --
Statist Playbook
"The solution to big government, is always bigger government." --
Statist Playbook
"The solution to a small government, is always a bigger government."
-- Statist Playbook
"The solution to government failure, is always bigger government
failure." -- Statist Playbook
"The solution to government failure in regulating business and trade,
is bigger and better plans for the government to regulate business and
trade." -- Statist Playbook
> 7 - As to any worker, immigrant or not, legal or not, employers seek to
> reduce cost and increase profitability by paying the least possible for
> labor. That's the system that is applauded, so long as it favors
> distributed growth. When it favors corporate profit, the obvious solution
> is a wholesale replacement of government, ...
Let's just put "abolishment" in there instead of "replacement." There
is no need to replace the old problem with a new one, which is the
same as the old. The experiment of government has been tinkered with
long enough. It is a failed doctrine. Just let it die.
> but since all politics is local,
> that is as likely as butter being a cure for high cholesterol levels.
If more of the politics were actually local, it would probably be a
better state of affairs. If you don't like the local jurisdiction,
the cost of exit is low. If you don't like the nation, the costs of
exit are very high.
> The ONLY political agenda or ideology
> is getting elected and RE-elected.
For politicians, yes. All life is politics, which is to say there is
power balance to deal with in pretty much every relationship. It is a
basic fact of being a social creature.
> 8 - The expense of inspecting and enforcing illegal labor is enormous. Not
> just the issue of illegal immigrants, but the results of typical
> black-market labor. Like the local mechanic who charges a little less and
> takes cash payments. Like the people on eBay who make a living there, yet
> either don't report income, or classify it as hobby income.
Anyone who manages to not hand over their assets to The State is a
Freedom Fighter. Applaude them.
I hope Jeter wins, just on principle.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-yankees-jeter-taxes&prov=ap&type=lgns
> 9 - Truly trade-union influences are always susceptible to cut-throat,
> cut-rate non union competition. Low price is hard to reject.
There is no problem there, so why did you write it?
> Illegal immigration is a problem only when the worst labor, industry,
> capital and taxation systems direct money away from personal incomes of
> individuals on the broad scale.
"Broad scale" is usually just a code phrase for commie-dom
redistributionist law. Other than that, I think I agree. There is no
problem of immigration if the legitimate owners of property invite
them there. There is no other legitimate criteria.
> Illegal immigrants allow lots of people to
> continue to enjoy the pleasures of daily life at lower cost, and today's
> enjoyment is considered more important to realize than the building of a
> foundation for a successful futre economy.
All people who would "construct an economy" are cranks. The "economy"
needs a construction plan in the same way a robin needs blueprints to
build their nest. The "economy" is generated via spontaneous order.
It does not exist due to the design of Man. Life has its own /
purpose/: itself. That does not mean it was "designed." /Purpose/ is
not inextricably linked to /design/. In this matter it is decidely
not.
"Liberty is the Mother, not the daughter, of order." -- Proudhon
> End of rant, for today.
> --
> Sandy
> -
> Darwinism, born in ideological struggle, has never escaped from an intimate
> reciprocal relationship with worldviews exported from and imported into the
> science. No one challenges the claim that evolutionary theory has had a wide
> effect on social theory. It is a cliché of cultural history that the
> explanation of evolution by natural selection served as an ideological
> justification for laissez-faire capitalism and the colonial domination of
> the lesser breeds without the law
>
> - Richard Lewontin
Lewontin thought there were "lesser breeds?" What a racist asswipe.
Social Darwinism is well dead, except in the minds of cranks. No one
pays any attention to them anyway. Get over it.