Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
March 22, 2006
Why U.S. Doesn't Need Guest Workers
By Robert Samuelson
WASHINGTON -- Economist Philip Martin of the University of California likes to tell a story about the state's tomato industry. In the early 1960s, growers relied on seasonal Mexican laborers, brought in under the government's ``bracero'' program. The Mexicans picked the tomatoes that were then processed into ketchup and other products. In 1964, Congress killed the program despite growers' warnings that its abolition would doom their industry. What happened? Well, plant scientists developed oblong tomatoes that could be harvested by machine. Since then, California's tomato output has risen five times.
It's a story worth remembering, because we're being warned again that we need huge numbers of ``guest workers'' -- meaning unskilled laborers from Mexico and Central America -- to relieve American ``labor shortages.'' Indeed, the shortages will supposedly worsen as the baby boom retires. President Bush wants an open-ended program. Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and John McCain, R-Ariz., advocate initially admitting 400,000 guest workers annually. The Senate is now considering these and other plans.
Gosh, they're all bad ideas.
Guest workers would mainly legalize today's vast inflows of illegal immigrants, with the same consequence: we'd be importing poverty. This isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking; many are. Nor is it because they don't assimilate; many do. But they generally don't go home, assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished. Since 1980, the number of Hispanics with incomes below the government's poverty line (about $19,300 in 2004 for a family of four) has risen 162 percent. Over the same period, the number of non-Hispanic whites in poverty rose 3 percent and the number of blacks, 9.5 percent.
What we have now -- and would with guest workers -- is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico. By and large, this is a bad bargain for the United States. It puts stresses on local schools, hospitals and housing; it feeds social tensions (witness the Minutemen).
The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers. The two simply aren't close substitutes for each other. Among immigrant Mexican and Central American workers in 2004, only 7 percent had a college degree and nearly 60 percent lacked a high-school diploma, says the Congressional Budget Office. Far from softening the social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited government benefits.
It's a myth that the U.S. economy ``needs'' more poor immigrants. The illegal immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor force, reports the Pew Hispanic Center. In no major occupation are they a majority. They're 36 percent of insulation workers, 28 percent of drywall installers and 20 percent of cooks. They're mainly drawn here by vast wage differences, not labor ``shortages.'' In 2004, the median hourly wage in Mexico was $1.86 compared to $9 for Mexicans working in the United States, says Rakesh Kochhar of Pew.
Hardly anyone thinks that most existing illegal immigrants will leave. But what would happen if, magically, new illegal immigration stopped and wasn't replaced by guest workers? Well, some employers would raise wages to attract U.S. workers. Facing greater labor costs, some industries would -- like the tomato growers in the 1960s -- find ways to minimize those costs. As to the rest, what's wrong with higher wages for the poorest workers? From 1994 to 2004, the wages of high-school dropouts rose only 2.3 percent (after inflation) compared to 11.9 percent for college graduates.
President Bush says his guest worker program would ``match willing foreign workers with willing American employers, when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs.'' But at some higher wage, there would be willing Americans. Indeed, the number of native high-school dropouts with jobs actually declined by 1.3 million from 2000 to 2005, estimates Steven A. Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors less immigration. Unemployment remains high for some groups (9.3 percent for African-Americans, 12.7 percent for white teenagers).
Business organizations understandably support guest worker programs. They like cheap labor and ignore the social consequences. What's more perplexing is why liberals support a program that worsens poverty and inequality.
It's said that guest workers are better than having poor illegal immigrants. With legal status, they'd have rights and protections. They'd have more peace of mind and face less exploitation by employers. This would be convincing if its premise were incontestable: that we can't control our southern border. But that's unproved. We've never tried a policy of real barriers and strict enforcement against companies that hire illegal immigrants. Until that's shown to be ineffective, we shouldn't adopt guest worker programs that don't solve serious social problems -- but add to them.
(c) 2006, The Washington Post Writers Group
Pale Rider said:I listened to some of the President's speach the other night. When he got to talking about illegals, every time he said, "we need them here to do the jobs American's won't do", I wanted to puke.
That one issue pisses me off bad about the Prez. I think he's dead ass wrong. I also think he's doing what he's doing so he won't get his ass shot off by a mexican when goes back to Texas after his term is up. I can't see any other REASONABLE reason he's being such an idiot about the MASSIVE illegal problem, ESPECIALLY in this post 9/11 day and age.
OCA said:Has anybody found these "supposed" workers we have waiting to do the jobs currently being done by illegals? Nah, didn't think so.
dilloduck said:Let's boot the illegals and see what happens--I wanna see some damn proof that Americans will not do the jobs and our economy will collapse. It's pretty easy to get em back if what everyone says is true about illegals.
Gonna have to be the states. No, there not tossing them...but tking some action anyway. About time.Nuc said:Good idea, let's do it. Who's going to do it? Obviously not the Republicans, they control the Presidency, House, Senate and most of the judiciary and they're not doing it.
The Democrats? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
So who?
OCA said:Has anybody found these "supposed" workers we have waiting to do the jobs currently being done by illegals? Nah, didn't think so.
A simple and undeniable fact is, and you can find all the tomato machine stories you want, if illegals are deported several western state economies will collapse, this is unargueable and sad but nevertheless it is true.
You know I know nobody here agrees with me on this subject but many moons ago I said that what will happen concerning illegals is exactly what is fixing to transpire soon, somebody at least give me some credit for calling this one correctly.
BTW, Mexican illegals have nothing to do with terrorism and 9/11, these are buzzterms used to rile emotions.
OCA said:Has anybody found these "supposed" workers we have waiting to do the jobs currently being done by illegals? Nah, didn't think so.
A simple and undeniable fact is, and you can find all the tomato machine stories you want, if illegals are deported several western state economies will collapse, this is unargueable and sad but nevertheless it is true.
You know I know nobody here agrees with me on this subject but many moons ago I said that what will happen concerning illegals is exactly what is fixing to transpire soon, somebody at least give me some credit for calling this one correctly.
BTW, Mexican illegals have nothing to do with terrorism and 9/11, these are buzzterms used to rile emotions.
OCA said:Has anybody found these "supposed" workers we have waiting to do the jobs currently being done by illegals? Nah, didn't think so.
A simple and undeniable fact is, and you can find all the tomato machine stories you want, if illegals are deported several western state economies will collapse, this is unargueable and sad but nevertheless it is true.
You know I know nobody here agrees with me on this subject but many moons ago I said that what will happen concerning illegals is exactly what is fixing to transpire soon, somebody at least give me some credit for calling this one correctly.
BTW, Mexican illegals have nothing to do with terrorism and 9/11, these are buzzterms used to rile emotions.
ThomasPaine said:Pay a decent wage and Americans will do the job. Pay below a decent wage to illegals, because you can to illegals that have no legal recourse, and Americans won't do the job. Sorry but you're just not giving unfettered capitalism; i.e. illegals altering normal capitalism with their willingness to work for wages below that which capitalism would support, a chance to set the market straight.
Nuc said:That's a good point. Isn't the solution to go after the people who hire illegals?
ThomasPaine said:Pay a decent wage and Americans will do the job. Pay below a decent wage to illegals, because you can to illegals that have no legal recourse, and Americans won't do the job. Sorry but you're just not giving unfettered capitalism; i.e. illegals altering normal capitalism with their willingness to work for wages below that which capitalism would support, a chance to set the market straight.
By the way this seems to be one of the only things that prompts posts from you. Care to explain why?
Pale Rider said:It's not just the tomato picking jobs the illegals are after anymore OCA. They're taking aim at the HIGHER paying jobs. Construction mainly. And where does millions and millions of their illegaly gotten wages go? Back to Mexico. Now how in blue blazes does that help America?
And no, mexicans aren't tied in with Al Queda, but the mexican border which is nothing but an open door, would be a great place for Al Queda to enter America undetected.
Illegals cost America more money than whatever it is they're contributing, and that is an unarguable fact.
OCA said:Pale have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, Mexicans outwork us? Winter before last they were putting in a little minimall by me with Bed, Bath & Beyond and all the other usual suspects and I ventured out to go to the grocery store about midnight on a Friday, fuck if the Mexicans weren't there drywalling and stuccoing at midnight in 15 degree weather, no bullshitting. Now you know brother that in no fucking way would I be there no matter what the pay was and i'd bet my last dollar that goes for almost all the rest of us. I believe that they have a better work ethic than we do and as a small business owner and speaking purely economically i'd hire one in a hot minute.
Pale Rider said:Hell I know they're hard workers OCA. There's NO debate about that. I lived in Phoenix. You could drive down on Southern Avenue any morning, and there'd be groups of Mexicans standing around waiting for someone, anyone, to pull over and hire them up for the day. And they'd do whatever shit job you had and NOT complain. Personaly, I have NOTHING against the Mexicans. What I do have a problem with is people entering this country illegaly.
I have to ask myself, "why don't they come here LEGALY"?
OCA said:Maybe that is a question better suited for government higherups.
Somewhere or another within the last year I read an article and the article was about these workers from this small village in Mexico who for decades now had been coming to America on a seasonal basis to clean blue crabs on Maryland's Eastern Shore for processing and eventually retail sale. Somehow or another a "quota" had been reached on workers entering legally and these people were not able to enter now and therefore the crab guys would suffer also because for sure they could never find domestic workers to do this god awful work, hence the reason they had hired the Mexicans in the first place.
Now we all talk about legally and illegally but does this really make sense in this case? These people were trying to do exactly what we want them to do and still they were denied.
I'll see if I can't find that archived article, I think its from the Baltimore Sun.
OCA said:Maybe that is a question better suited for government higherups.
Somewhere or another within the last year I read an article and the article was about these workers from this small village in Mexico who for decades now had been coming to America on a seasonal basis to clean blue crabs on Maryland's Eastern Shore for processing and eventually retail sale. Somehow or another a "quota" had been reached on workers entering legally and these people were not able to enter now and therefore the crab guys would suffer also because for sure they could never find domestic workers to do this god awful work, hence the reason they had hired the Mexicans in the first place.
Now we all talk about legally and illegally but does this really make sense in this case? These people were trying to do exactly what we want them to do and still they were denied.
I'll see if I can't find that archived article, I think its from the Baltimore Sun.
