Immigration is the next big wedge issue in American politics. Already divided in two, the issue threatens to further divide us into four camps. Sort of like cell division: halves, quarters, and bits.*
Among Republicans, the new division is between the nativists (against) and the libertarians (for).
Among Democrats are the progressive permanent majority dreamers (for) and the old hard line labor types (against).
First, If the goal is to enhance the wages of lower-skilled American workers, about whom Obama purports to care so much, there is an easy way to make progress toward that goal: stop importing tens of millions of low-skilled immigrants to compete with them and drive wages down.
Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas found that high levels of immigration between 1980 and 2000 caused the wages of lower-skilled American workers to drop nearly 8 percent. He also found current immigration levels have resulted in a $402 billion annual wage loss for workers but a $437 billion increase in profits for business owners. Obama Pivots To Income Inequality
_____________________
* One eighth of a dollar was one "bit". [ref]
12 comments:
Sell...
I see what you did there.
Libertarians are for amnesty?
Amartel said...
Libertarians are for amnesty?
Not all, although probably most are.
I think the main objection for conservatives is the unfairness of sneaking in line, breaking the law, and getting away with it. That's it for me. I'm all for immigration if we can get that made fair somehow.
Some people also care about job displacement, but that probably goes to both sides, and of course only the Democrats see it as easy new voters. This is pretty much a running theme with Democrats: doing the wrong or unsustainable thing for the sake of power or compassion. Kind of stupid in the long run.
That is a haploid cell. The amazing thing about yeast cell is its diploid nature. If I have it right. I drew a picture. 9 pictures. With music. And now the plug-in changed and the page is dead. But it lives! It is a zombie page.
I'll have to do something about that sometime. The thing is, my information was in Spanish and my Spanish is dodgy as everything else so I'm not sure I have anything right. But here's how I understand what makes diploid cells so brilliant:
They have two complete sets of dna information and two ways of sexing it up and an emergency system that results in 4 protected 1/2 sets that can duplicate themselves, connect for a full set, or sex it up and combine with another type to contain 4 (1/2) sets again.
That's hard to visualize. When you make a lot of yeast dough under varying circumstances you notice it peaks and falls back and can nearly perish and with just a little encouragement, fresh food and new water, the whole thing explodes as if waiting for the chance. Graphed, it would look like a rollercoaster.
The individual cells being blown about, stressed somehow, their environment made unhappy somehow, carried of by insects or sheered by particulate, can be an individual light blue or light red and bud this way happily cloning itself expanding as two versions of itself. In that phase between budding there are two sets of dna within a cell wall and light blue becomes dark blue because the cell is eating, taking its environment unto itself and changing it into itself, and farting. The buds can detach or grow as fractals like a tree. They can break off and hook up with their corresponding type, dissolve the wall between them, combine dna sets and become purple.
In emergency when their environment is trashed, each dna portion tightens up into wad and forms a tight shell around itself and shuts down until the environment changes again to something salubrious sufficient break down the shell allowing it to proceed to bud and to recombine as before.
I think, but I'm not sure, a pure libertarian stance would be free movement of capital and free movement of labor.
Libertarians are for amnesty?
Libertarians (for the most part) are for open borders.
But I don't think it is accurate to say that the libertarian wing of the GOP is the pro-amnesty one. The business wing of the GOP is pro-amnesty too, and a lot bigger and better-funded.
Yeah, that's been my experience. Libertarians are mixed on amnesty. In theory, people should be free to move about, especially to their betterment. In practice, mass migrations of poor people are ripe for exploitation by greedy governments and their corporate cronies.
It's really a religious issue. The Left passionately wants and constantly pushes for a borderless America. In other words the Left is driven to end America, as step one in its divine One World plan. All must merge in an undifferentiated utopia. Doesn't matter how mad such an imperative is, the point is that it is an imperative, a religious imperative.
Those who see merging as horror, the end of separateness, in effect the death of the distinct individual nation that is America, are as fundamentally opposed to open borders as the Left insists on them.
This is not one of those split the difference issues. It is literally life or death for a country which won't exist if "fundamental transformation" wins.
This isn't immigration, it's bonded indenture.
The Lefties want to do to Mexicans in this country what the Euros did with the Moslems over the last 40 years.
And it will end the same way.
But I don't think it is accurate to say that the libertarian wing of the GOP is the pro-amnesty one. The business wing of the GOP is pro-amnesty too, and a lot bigger and better-funded.
Libertarian is code for fiscal conservative/social liberal. I bet a lot of big business owners are in that camp, outside of the Midwest.
Libertarian is code for fiscal conservative/social liberal.
Yes, it is often (incorrectly) used that way, but that doesn't describe the GOP's business wing, which is very much into crony capitalism but agnostic on social issues.
Post a Comment