More illegal immigrants from India crossing border
18th July 2011
Indians have arrived in droves even as the overall number of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. has dropped dramatically, in large part because of the sluggish American economy. And with fewer Mexicans and Central Americans crossing the border, smugglers are eager for more “high-value cargo” like Indians, some of whom are willing to pay more than $20,000 for the journey.
Ought we to be as worried about illegal immigrants from India as we would be about illegal immigrants from other countries?
The influx has been so pronounced that in May, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a Senate committee that at some point this year, Indians will account for about 1 in 3 non-Mexican illegal immigrants caught in Texas.
I must confess that I find it hard to get worked up about it, perhaps because I am not worried that they will (a) attempt to blow people up, like Muslims, or (b) attempt to subvert the existing American culture, like Hispanics. But is that a reasonable position? I must confess that I’m not all that sure.
July 18th, 2011 at 10:48
If you control the border, no drugs or illegals come to the USA and no guns or drug monies go to Mexico.
If you don’t control the border – well, then you have the mess we have now.
July 18th, 2011 at 11:02
On the other hand, if you legalize the drugs (which fuel the entire mess), you take the money out of the equation and the drugs can–and will–be produced domestically, the import market will collapse, the thugs in Mexico won’t have the money to buy the guns, and we save a ton of money with the end of the so-called Drug War.
Since we are incapable of stemmnig Demand, we can only “solve” the problem by working on the Supply.
The Invisible Hand at work. A good market-based solution. I know a number of high-ranking Republicans are already espousing it in private; what I’m wondering is how long it will take before they come out and say it publicly. Probably not until we’ve wasted another 20 years. But I have hope.
July 18th, 2011 at 12:32
Really? I can’t believe I missed that one on the List of Liberal Sayings. “Just legalize drugs and everyone will stop using them. Crime will go away.” Because that has worked so well….er, where?
Maybe all those Indians crossing the border will stop because they won’t want their kids growing up in a land of addicts.
And then the Unicorns will reappear and the true Age of Aquarius will come to pass.
Meh. I just don’t see it. Much better to have a government that deals with reality (instead of the world they dreamed of while smoking dope and reading from Marx) and we pretend a border means something and lock it down. Shoot, we can get volunteers to do it, if the boys in Washington will just kick in a little cash for gas and ammo.
July 18th, 2011 at 13:03
Actually, it was on the List of Libertarian Sayings. I’m surprised you missed it.
“Stop using drugs”? Won’t happen, anymore than prostitution, or gambling (the state got smart there: legalize it, tax it, and regulate it), or drinking (we actually tried that, with miserable results), or any of the other Moral Ills that conservatives are so fond of trying to stamp out by fiat.
As for Locking Down The Border, we would simply be trading one giant expensive boondoggle for another. (Can you say, “police state”? I thought you could.) It worked so well for Germany, after all…
No, I’m afraid drugs are here to stay, because “There’s a market for it”. And where there’s a market, there will be entrepreneurs willing to supply. Making it illegal just artificially restricts supply, with the concomitant upward affect on prices, which in turn attracts more such “entrepreneurs”. Econ 101.
The Invisible Hand, and all that, you know.
I love the “if the boys in Washington will just kick in a little cash for gas and ammo” part. I thought conservatives were against government involvement? What happened to the good ol’ up-by-the-bootstraps self-sufficient spirit? Go organize a militia and do the job; stop whining that the Gubmint ain’t helping.
July 18th, 2011 at 14:10
If you recall, there was a group that went to the border with the sole intention of monitoring it an reporting illegal crossings to the authorities. The government ran them off. If Washington will give the go-ahead, I’m pretty Texas could seal the border with volunteers. OK, we’ll chip in our own ammo, but can we at least get a pass on the Environmental Impact Statement?
Good job on bringing up the comparison to Nazis, though it really doesn’t apply to keeping people from illegally entering the country. You might have pointed out that the Communists tried to keep people from LEAVING the country. It doesn’t directly apply, but they did have better success than the O Admin.
You missed blaming it all on Bush and/or Global Warming. No unicorns for you!
July 18th, 2011 at 16:38
I don’t want a unicorn. A simple pony would do.
And I wasn’t referring to the Nazis, but rather to Communist East Germany. And the direction in which people want to cross is irrelevant: closed is closed. As the Black Knight says, “None shall pass.”
It worked for some 60 years, but eventually it failed–as do all such “lock the door once I’m inside (or outside, whichever applies)” schemes.
Besides, take away the drugs, and what do you have? Immigrants eager to cross the border and take any ol’ trivial, nasty, demeaning, low-paying job just to stay here. (Shades of the Irish and the Italians in the 19th century.)
And just as the Italians, Irish, Poles, and Germans did in the 19th century, they embody the Capitalist Wet Dream–dirt cheap labor to exploi…er, I mean, to “increase productivity”.
July 18th, 2011 at 21:15
@ Nagle
““Stop using drugs”? Won’t happen, anymore than prostitution, or gambling (the state got smart there: legalize it, tax it, and regulate it), or drinking (we actually tried that, with miserable results), or any of the other Moral Ills that conservatives are so fond of trying to stamp out by fiat.”
**So it makes sense to legalize drugs so they can be regulated and taxed but the border should be unregulated and “untaxed”? I don’t buy it. Open, unregulated borders and cheap, legal drugs with a taxpayer funded healthcare plan. Perfect for… “And then the Unicorns will reappear and the true Age of Aquarius will come to pass.” AKA the death of a great nation.
**Prohibition did not fail by the way. The Great Depression simply displaced it as a priority. This example also provides ample evidence that the “thugs in Mexico” will not go away. For instance, Prohibition is traditionally blamed for the rise of organized crime. The repeal of Prohibition did not make organized crime go away.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/
“No, I’m afraid drugs are here to stay, because “There’s a market for it”. And where there’s a market, there will be entrepreneurs willing to supply. Making it illegal just artificially restricts supply, with the concomitant upward affect on prices, which in turn attracts more such “entrepreneurs”. Econ 101.”
** Removing restrictions (artificial or otherwise) and lowering the price of drugs will do what to demand? That’s right, increase it. (Econ 101) Will it make more people’s lives better? Have you thought about the collateral damage? Broken homes, parentless children, addicted children, child abuse/neglect, DUI deaths, public funded detox facilities… Come on maaaannn.
July 18th, 2011 at 23:38
@ Whithawk
I’m reminded of Ron Paul during a recent debate. He said to the audience, “Let’s have a show of hands; how many here will go out and start using drugs tomorrow if they’re legal?”
Removing restrictions and thereby lowering the price may increase demand, but I suspect not that greatly–they are already in high demand, and those inclined to use them are already doing so, even though they are illegal. What it WILL do is take all the big money out of the transaction, thereby starving the thugs of huge profits which they now use to buy guns and subvert public servants like police and judges. And all those “big drug busts” that the authorities like to trumpet in the media? The drug lords just figure that in as a cost of doing business. It will also remove any incentive for the “turf wars” that now scourge the Tex-Mex border.
And what are you, some kinda Bleeding Heart Liberal? “Broken homes, parentless children, addicted children, child abuse/neglect”, etc., etc. I thought only the Do-Gooders on the Left whined about that and wanted The Government to Do Something to Protect People.
Spare me the river of tears over the poor unfortunate stupid people who needed to be protected from themselves. It rings hollow. Embracing freedom includes the freedom of people to destroy themselves.
BTW, you are correct that ending prohibition didn’t end organized crime–but they no longer run rum or fight over alcohol distribution territories, do they? They’ve just moved on to other illegal activities which have a high market demand and provide bigger profits–like prostitution and drugs.
July 19th, 2011 at 13:57
@ Nagle
**Regarding Ron Paul’s unofficial survey, if someone said, “If we legalize prostitution tomorrow how many will be participating, please raise your hand?” do you really think you’d get an honest, accurate response?
**You have a long bill to fill making the case that making drugs cheap and legal will not dramtically increase their use. Just say it to yourself once out loud, “Making drugs cheap and legal will not increase their use much.”
“And what are you, some kinda Bleeding Heart Liberal? “Broken homes, parentless children, addicted children, child abuse/neglect”, etc., etc. I thought only the Do-Gooders on the Left whined about that and wanted The Government to Do Something to Protect People.”
**You have a fundemental misunderstanding of what it means to be a conservative and a liberal for that matter. I hear no one on the left concerned about the moral condition of families/children. It is also foolishly short sighted to think promoting/allowing this kind of society will have no DIRECT effect on you. Either by personal encroachment (drunk driver, drug induced rage) or getting the bill for keeping those sold into the lifestyle out of society where they can’t hurt people. Other than enforce morally sound laws I don’t expect the Government to do anything.
“Spare me the river of tears over the poor unfortunate stupid people who needed to be protected from themselves. It rings hollow. Embracing freedom includes the freedom of people to destroy themselves.”
** REAL freedom includes the freedom to embrace a standard of morality that promotes a healthy lifestyle for everyone. You should at the least have a financial stake in this hunt if not sentimental (your empathy is heartwarming). “Stupid” people destroying themselves can take a lot of innocent people with them and when they don’t do a complete job of it are left hopelessly dependent on others.
“BTW, you are correct that ending prohibition didn’t end organized crime–but they no longer run rum or fight over alcohol distribution territories, do they? They’ve just moved on to other illegal activities which have a high market demand and provide bigger profits–like prostitution and drugs.”
**So what will they “move on to” when you legalize drugs? Legalizing gambling in many states over the last two decades did not decrease crime and dramatically increased the number of people who engage in it. It has increased crime and the mob has kept its business ties in the gambling industry.
http://www.casinowatch.org/crime/mob.html
I’m just sayin.