Immigration - Thank-You Cardinal O'Malley

[on_the_hill]

Go into a Lowe’s or a Home Depot. You will see that virtually everything in the store is bilingual, and the reason for that is obvious.

I don’t see why bilingual signs are a bad thing.
As an aside, I’d heard the story that during the 1920s the Kaufmann’s Department Store in Pittsburgh had customer service phone operators speaking nine different languages. I can’t verify that, however.

I recently had some tile work done in my house and was talking with the worker. He said that in the past he used to get $15 a square foot to lay marble, but that today he got only $5, which was better than in Miami where workers only got $1.50.

A worker got $15/sq. ft.? That seems unlikely. Laying down ten tiles would be $150. He would’ve been making hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars an hour. Heck, I’d lay tile for $1.50 apiece. Think about it. You could easily lay two or three hundred tiles in a day.

 

[Ender]

You counter formal studies, done scientifically, with more informal anecdotes.

Actually, I countered a claim regarding formal studies with an account of personal experience, as in: “Who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”

Anecdotes do not belie anything. If you know of a formal study that shows that immigration depresses the economy, please cite it.

There is more involved here than just a concern about how immigration “depresses the economy.” There is the undeniable effect on US citizens, especially the least skilled.

Many of the studies that document and examine employer preferences have been reviewed and summarized in a 2013 volume by John Skrentny, After Civil Rights: Racial Realism in the American Workplace (Princeton University Press, 2013)

Study after study makes clear that “employers of low skilled workers have become increasingly enamored of Latinos . . . [and] Asian workers,” and that, in the eyes of many businesses, “immigrant status seem to be a major plus for both groups.” In contrast, American laborers, “including whites, but especially blacks,” have become “the least desired group” of workers. Although white native workers are seldom considered equal to Asians and Latino immigrants, black workers, especially from inner-city backgrounds, are routinely disparaged and avoided.

Did you really not believe these studies existed, or that it would be all that difficult to find them?

 

[ktmeyer]

It wasn’t just a free pass to the US during the Irish, Italian, other European immigrant waves from 1892-1954. It was literally called an “Immigrant Inspection Station”. People with health problems, criminal background, unskilled workers were sent back home.

The potato famine migration was decades before that and no they were not skilled laborers. http://www.history.com/news/when-america-despised-the-irish-the-19th-centurys-refugee-crisis

“These people were not only poor, unskilled refugees huddled in rickety tenements. Even worse, they were Catholic.”

 

[Ender]

I’d lay tile for $1.50 apiece.

Laying tile is simple. I was speaking specifically of marble. Whether he meant more than marble tile wasn’t clarified. The point he made, however, was clear: the rate for a specific job had dropped by two thirds locally, and by 90% in Miami. As has been pointed out before: it is a question of supply and demand. If a lot of people can perform the same job, the amount paid for the job will decline.

I don’t see why bilingual signs are a bad thing.

I didn’t comment on it to suggest it was in itself bad, only that it was indicative of the situation I was discussing: the replacement of native workers in the building trades by Hispanic immigrants.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

As fun as it is arguing about different time periods, I thought I would add this quick synopsis from
USCIS:

“Americans encouraged relatively free and open immigration during the 18th and
early 19th centuries, and rarely questioned that policy until the late
1800s. After certain states passed immigration laws following the Civil
War, the Supreme Court in 1875 declared regulation of immigration a
federal responsibility. Thus, as the number of immigrants rose in the
1880s and economic conditions in some areas worsened, Congress began to
pass immigration legislation.
The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and
1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States.
The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on
each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics,
convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.
These national immigration laws created the need for new federal enforcement
authorities. In the 1880s, state boards or commissions enforced
immigration law with direction from U.S. Treasury Department officials.
At the Federal level, U.S. Customs Collectors at each port of entry
collected the head tax from immigrants while “Chinese Inspectors”
enforced the Chinese Exclusion Act.”

Early American Immigration Policies | USCIS

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

At least one fact in this History Channel article seems suspect.

“According to “Irish Famine Facts” by John Keating, the average adult working male in Ireland consumed a staggering 14 pounds of potatoes per day, while the average adult Irish woman ate 11.2 pounds.”

Really - - 12-14 POUNDS of potatoes per day? Anyone else find this not very credible?

 

[RandomAlias]

Really - - 12-14 POUNDS of potatoes per day? Anyone else find this not very credible?

Do the math. It is credible.

A laborer who subsists on a diet of mostly potatoes would need to eat quite a lot; 11 to 14 pounds is not out of the question. At 350 calories per pound of potatoes, that works out to 3850 to 4900 calories. That is high in comparison to the “average” American (2000 to 2500 calories) but not unreasonable for laborers, who need more food energy.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

You counter formal studies, done scientifically, with more informal anecdotes.

Actually, I countered a claim regarding formal studies with an account of personal experience, as in: “Who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”

The claim is statistical in nature. You cannot counter it with a few individual personal experiences.

Anecdotes do not belie anything. If you know of a formal study that shows that immigration depresses the economy, please cite it.

There is more involved here than just a concern about how immigration “depresses the economy.” There is the undeniable effect on US citizens, especially the least skilled.

A study of employers statements made by interviewing employers about who they prefer to hire is not a study on the effect of immigration on other workers.

 

[joemel]

The church has had problems getting Visas for priests from Africa to work
here in the U.S… The population of African priests in the U.S. has risen
significantly, possibly misleading many into thinking that the process is
easy, cut, and dry. I would also bet that the travel ban, affecting 3
different countries from Africa specifically, is of no help as well. The
system is broken and our Catholic Church can provide us with some good
guidance (
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...gration/churchteachingonimmigrationreform.cfm)
(http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=16334). As for Father
Rey Pineda, you would have to email him yourself to find out his specific
circumstances rather than make any particular assumptions. As a priest and
representative of God I prefer to see him much differently and
respectfully. His parish and contact information can be found through a
quick and simple search on the world wide web.

 

[ktmeyer]

Dude, again, the Potato famine was in 1847. Therefore those immigrants were not subject to laws put in place in 1882, nearly 40 years later.

Also, it has been shown that immigrants add more into their communities economically than they take, so the bolded part about “public charge” doesn’t really have anything to do with the current situation. The Mexicans and others coming here doing lawn work and other jobs are not any less skilled than the irish potato farmers were.

 

[on_the_hill]

This is from George Will’s column on Sunday, Jan. 21, 2018:

After 9/11, attitudes about immigration became entangled with policies about terrorism. So, as The Economist noted, “a mass murder committed by mostly Saudi terrorists resulted in an almost limitless amount of money being made available for the deportation of Mexican house-painters.”

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

They maybe ate 4000 calories a day of potatoes, okay, if you say so, where did they get that many potatoes day in and day out?
Didn’t a typical Irish family in this time period have a very small plot of land?

 

[Theo520]

No, I don’t think the Catholic Church was getting their seminary students from Syria, North Korea, Yemen, Chad, Libya, Iran, or Somolia. Chad might be the exception, but there was a process for the embassy to grant exceptions.

Father Pineda’s situation is very clear, his status is covered as a Dreamer. I expect the program to be made legal, but he can apply for another program, just like all the other Dreamers currently using their temporary DACA visas.

I disagree with your article, the Church should implement the concept of Subsidiarity and put their focus on reducing the corruption and problems in mexico, not foisting them on the US. The Catholic church has great influence in Mexico.

The ‘more prosperous’ nations are not obliged to accept all the economic migrants that want to work there.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

One thing is for sure, no one’s mind is going to be changed based on internet forum back and forth discussions where the same people bring out the same points time and again in every thread.

 

[signit]

Dude, again, the Potato famine was in 1847. Therefore those immigrants were not subject to laws put in place in 1882, nearly 40 years later.

Also, it has been shown that immigrants add more into their communities economically than they take, so the bolded part about “public charge” doesn’t really have anything to do with the current situation. The Mexicans and others coming here doing lawn work and other jobs are not any less skilled than the irish potato farmers were.

Okay, but, again, one of my points back in post #23 was that it’s a different America today (not that the people coming over today are not necessarily less skilled).

When my relatives came over from the “old country” they settled in a mill town where there were more unskilled jobs than people to fill them. One of these jobs could support an entire family without a spouse having to work.

Today those jobs are largely gone. So it follows that we can’t afford to have the same immigration policies as we did in those days.

 

[signit]

One thing is for sure, no one’s mind is going to be changed based on internet forum back and forth discussions where the same people bring out the same points time and again in every thread.

Maybe you’re right. It all depends on one’s perspective and one’s life experience.

If you’re a low-wage working-class person, or have ever been one, or came from that type of family, you might look at the issue from the perspective of the low-wage person and that person’s employment and wages.

If you’re fairly upscale, you might see the benefits immigrants might bring to the broader economy.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

Ha ha.
Every now and then there’s someone new to argue with!

 

[Theo520]

One thing is for sure, no one’s mind is going to be changed based on internet forum back and forth discussions where the same people bring out the same points time and again in every thread.

I’ve had my mind changed on topics here, when people presented facts and clear arguments that supported their position. But it does take engaging with integrity.

 

[Ender]

The claim is statistical in nature. You cannot counter it with a few individual personal experiences.

You made a claim that “studies show…”. I made a counter claim: “other studies show the opposite”. Neither of us provided an example, but I at least provided anecdotal evidence to support my position. You have provided nothing but assertions substantiated by nothing at all.

A study of employers statements made by interviewing employers about who they prefer to hire is not a study on the effect of immigration on other workers.

It is if you’re actually trying to get a job, where the opinions of employers is more than a philosophical discussion.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

Should I start a different thread on how many pounds of potatoes the Irish ate before the Potato Famine? Because I think I’m finding some better sources.