Hacker News Reader

The problem with your “cutting in line is bad” line is that people’s choice to immigrate without papers has almost nothing to do with “lines” or policies or lawbreaking, and everything to do with the much more powerfully compelling economic organization of the world (and particularly North America).

1) United States agriculture absolutely depends on a certain amount of unskilled labor to function, for which the United States has been importing Mexican laborers in large numbers for at least 80 years. Ending this importation of labor would literally cause the agriculture system in this country to break down.

2) Many parts of Mexico have been economically depressed with high underemployment/unemployment for decades. There are physically too many people for the quantity of available jobs.

The undocumented immigrants I know (including my parents’ godson who is a migrant agricultural laborer, including several guys who stayed in my family’s house for a few months in the early 1990s, including 30-50% of young men from many indigenous communities in southern Mexico, etc.) DO NOT want to leave their parents, their wives, their children, their communities to go to a strange place where they do not speak the language to do hard labor, missing their children’s early years, DO NOT want to take on tremendous personal financial risk in the form of huge loans from loan sharks who will happily repossess their family’s home or start sending goons to beat people up if the money isn’t repaid.

Unfortunately, the choice is often hover-your-whole-life-just-above-or-below-subsistence-level (i.e. take on personally degrading and dangerous jobs to feed your family, risk starvation, etc.), or clear out and go somewhere else. If the outlet of leaving to the United States were unavailable as an escape valve, I’m quite convinced many would end up either starving or turning to other kinds of desperate action.

In other words, not really a choice at all.

You’re damn right that a system that has people staying in this country without papers isn’t fair and allows those people to be taken advantage of. You know what else isn’t fair and allows people to be taken advantage of? The whole global economic order.

[Note: this is not intended as a call to any particular action; just trying to state facts.]

I sympathize but, ultimately, do not find your argument compelling.

Mexico isn't the only poor country in the world. They just happen to be the one that's closest to the US. When my parents legally immigrated here, South Korea was a poor nation. Look at the history of US immigration and you'll see that this is a pattern (eg. Irish and Italians in the 1900s to modern day immigrants from Africa and Asia).

I'm from LA so I'm well aware of the economic contributions of the Mexican illegal immigrants.

With that said, I don't necessarily agree with your positions. Due to the massive rate of illegal immigration, agriculture has been able to thrive on low cost economics. If they didn't have that labor, it doesn't mean the US would shut down. What it would mean is that the US would have to adjust the economics in order to make it viable. This could result in the following:

a) A much larger legal guest worker program. b) Importing more agriculture from countries like Mexico. c) Higher wages for legal farm workers (including legal residents of Mexican origin).

In all 3 of these cases, it would lead to be a better situation for Mexican-Americans or Mexico. In the case of b), it would help the economics of Mexico.

I sympathize that Mexico is a poor country. Like I said before, there are many poor countries in this world. I don't want to sound callous but I don't understand how this is specifically the responsibility of the US. We don't even have a nationalized health system.

Also, allowing illegal immigration does not help Mexico in the long term. It won't fix their lack of economy and unemployment problems. Saying there are "physically too many people" is an excuse IMO. Every country battles the problem of unemployment.

I don't think that anyone not from l.a. understand the illegal immigration thing going on here. it's difficult to give the full image.

I'm living here for more than a year and am still shocked that there are neighborhoods that only speak their native language and are virtually paperless... even though some of them goes to tijuana every other weekend. I'm here legally and still avoid going to mexico to avoid the hassle.

I didn't meant to imply that. I just meant what I said which was that I'm well-aware of the illegal immigrant situation since I've lived in the middle of it.

Anyone can do (almost) anything illegal and blame it on "Global economic order". Does it really justify the illegal actions?

    There is a legal system and many people every year try 
    to go through that system like my parents did. I see
    illegal immigrants as "cutting in line" and I see 
    nothing fair about it.

The problem is that if you are not a student there is basically no way to legally immigrate except:

1. Marrying an american

2. Indentured servitude via H1-B (hard to get, and if you leave your job/get fired you have to find a new job in two weeks or leave)

It used to be a lot easier in the past.

If you think the privilege of an H1B is "indentured servitude", it seems that immigration is not for you. I don't expect to enter a foreign country and immediately have all the same worker rights as a citizen of that country.

    If you think the privilege of an H1B is 
    "indentured servitude", it seems that 
    immigration is not for you.

Funny that you say that, I have been an immigrant for almost 7 years now in the European Union (where it's significantly easier than in the US).

I am educated, healthy, young, have no criminal record and as a programmer I earn a significantly higher than average salary (and therefor pay significantly higher than average taxes).

I can say with a straight face that probably any country I choose to live in will benefit from me being there, so why would you want to keep skilled people like me out?

Do they? Just the other day I met an entrepreneur who was not American (either Canadian or European) who's able to work here on a "extraordinary ability" visa. He wasn't under an H1B and he's starting his own company.

My original point is that H1B is not a right, it's a privilege. Even though you're awesome (by your own account), I fail to see why you're owed anything.

I'm not owed anything, I'm arguing that it's in the country's interest to attract skilled labor (which many other western countries like Australia, Canada & New Zealand do with their vastly easier immigration policies).

Could you explain why immigrants should not have equal rights with born in the US citizens?

Well 1) that is the rule of law. It's not just the case for the US but many other modern nations in this world.

2) Being a citizen doesn't just have benefits but also responsibilities. This is why we pledge allegiance.

At age 21 I had to register for the civil service. That means that if my country goes to war and I'm drafted then I must fight and possibly die for my country.

An illegal immigrant will not be drafted.

It also means other things I'm bound under federal law like paying taxes. There are also other civil duties like being on a jury to judge my fellow citizens. As a citizen, I'm bound by the laws on our constitution and those created by our legislature.

3) The privileges of a citizen allow them to contribute to the way our democracy functions including the right to vote.

An illegal immigrant cannot vote.

The rest of my argument was already stated above to you. If we completely open the borders to everyone, then our government wouldn't even be able to serve the current legal citizens.

You may dislike the system but in other countries such as Japan and Germany it is even more difficult and exclusionary. They are based on parentage and while that make more sense to you, it actually ends up leaving large classes of immigrants unnaturalized.

1) So basically your explanation goes like that: "Discrimination against immigrants is justified, because it's a law and other countries discriminate even worse than the US".

I hoped for somewhat better reasoning than that. If you take "it's a law and it must stay unchanged" principle to the heart, then you would be dead by now killed as invader by one of American-Indian tribes.

2) "Opening borders to everyone" has very little to do with "Stopping discrimination against immigrants".

It's two-fold. On one hand, it's the law. On the other hand, I consider it a fair law. Pointing to other countries was simply to show that the US isn't alone in this thinking.

It has everything to do with opening the borders because if illegal immigrants have all the same rights as citizens then you're essentially inviting every immigrant to come to the US.

Of anyone, I would think you understand that our physical borders does not do a great job of preventing illegal immigrants from entering the country.

You seem to pick and choose your literal arguments from your theoretical ones.

> That means that if my country goes to war and I'm drafted then I must fight and possibly die for my country.

Societies that raise slave armies aren't free.

Or, did I miss where you'd be able to abstain if, for instance, you knew the whole thing was a farce?

> Being a citizen doesn't just have benefits but also responsibilities.

And consequences. If you're a US taxpayer (one of about 200M) you've recently paid for the killing of about 1/100th of someone, likely a non-combatant.

Not to count (of course) those your country's policies have merely displaced, such as many of the poor in Mexico, victims of "Free Trade" and the like.

Darned illegals.

> If we completely open the borders to everyone, then our government wouldn't even be able to serve the current legal citizens.

Cite needed.

The USA can manufacture and deliver a bomb for every man, woman, and child in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc, and you don't think it could provide basic food and medical instead?

The USA is not responsible for the citizens of Mexico and to imply that they are is actually insulting to Mexico. It says that they can't take care of their own citizens.

Everything else you said is simply biased slander on your part.

We've screwed them over in war, taken land, and forced them to accept unfair treaties. While that's not all that's happened to them, it is enough.

Like Iraq. It may crawl back to where it was before the attack but only at ten times the effort. Likely it'll bear the scars of the war for a century and, if the USA gets its way, suffer "treaties" long after that. Is it insulting to the Iraqis to say that this will set them back, or is it realistic?

> Everything else you said is simply biased slander on your part.

I could say you're a pro-USA fanboy who'll blindly support them regardless because he's afraid his loyalty will be questioned and his citizenship revoked. But, even if I feel you act that way, I won't. Srs. So don't do it to me either, k?

You forgot sponsoring/petitioning a relative AND the visa lottery (a relative of mine was lucky enough to receive one of these, was able to bring his whole family here, eventually). It has taken us 20 years to bring about 35-40 relatives from South America (more are waiting--in line)... it takes time, money and a LOT of patience. Also helps if you don't get into problems with the law.

If the US would dump Jose Vargas, I assure you, his home country would gladly accept him and big opportunity awaits him here.

For sure the big papers and TV network here in the Philippines would race to get Jose to join them.

JV, it's time to face another world. We got your back!