Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
From the Economist - And as usual I agree 100%. Any of you Union lovers, or Xenophobes, want to disparage this legislation?
|
It's potentially a good bill (and a good article). Also interesting that the AFL-CIO has merely declined to endorse it, rather than affirmatively support it.
At the risk of being called a "union-lover" or "xenophobe," I wonder about the provision that lets you hire immigrants if you can prove that Americans won't take the job -- how do you go about proving that? And what if Americans would take the job for slightly higher pay? That last part is really the crux of union opposition to increased immigration -- that there are jobs that often go to illegals because the pay is so low, but when the pay is decent Americans and legal immigrants are willing to take them (restaurant and hotel jobs is one example -- very commonly staffed by illegals in some communities, but in others, like Las Vegas, they are filled with people legally in the country).
The discussion of the unintended side effects of immigration laws -- like having "coyotes" who will help terrorists get in the country --- is interesting, but there is no real evidence, or even argument, in the article that the bill would prevent this. Unless we adopt a full open border policy, I don't see coyotes being driven out of business.
Note: You should post links instead of complete articles. Copyright and such.
Threaded Mode