We can't fix Detroit or Baltimore yet we entertain the notion that we can "help" entire countries?
23
The root cause of migration is simply this: these peoples' home countries are doing terribly. They're corrupt, fascist, often theocratic, and overrun by crime. Their economies are stagnant, unemployment and poverty are high. Overpopulation is endemic. That's why anyone who thinks they have a shot tries to get out of those countries and come to a nice, fairly civilized one like the U.S., where life can be pretty enjoyable. If you're poor in Honduras, life is mostly painful and exhausting.
Until that root cause is taken care of, the illegal immigrants will keep trying. Alternate strategies could be tried, like giving them the option to either choose deportation or indentured servitude, say for a thirty year term. Societies have done this before and it doesn't work out so badly. When things get desperate, then the strategy of slaying all illegal immigrants on sight will be used instead; it's not a nice policy, but desperate times always cause desperate measures.
So avoiding that sort of immoral response, probably the best thing would be to benevolently invade and absorb these states, Crimea-style, and thus take care of the corruption, crime, and economic stagnation in a more efficient way.
Of course nobody likes that idea either because of archaic notions of national sovereignity, so ya know what, no solution is going to be palatable and this problem will not be solved, period.
Until that root cause is taken care of, the illegal immigrants will keep trying. Alternate strategies could be tried, like giving them the option to either choose deportation or indentured servitude, say for a thirty year term. Societies have done this before and it doesn't work out so badly. When things get desperate, then the strategy of slaying all illegal immigrants on sight will be used instead; it's not a nice policy, but desperate times always cause desperate measures.
So avoiding that sort of immoral response, probably the best thing would be to benevolently invade and absorb these states, Crimea-style, and thus take care of the corruption, crime, and economic stagnation in a more efficient way.
Of course nobody likes that idea either because of archaic notions of national sovereignity, so ya know what, no solution is going to be palatable and this problem will not be solved, period.
6
Our county library is only open 24 hours a week and is hanging on for dear life. Let's save it first before we end up as impoverished as central America.
29
The NYT presents the indefensible liberal viewpoint on immigration: there should be no limits on it and that anyone who disagrees with that viewpoint is blithely condemning innocent poor people to, at the very least, a life nasty, brutish, and short. I'm a liberal who yearns for some common sense. For instance, California is running out of water. There are few living wage jobs. Our schools are underfunded and dysfunctional, K-12 and higher ed. Our beaches are covered with oil tar balls and our ocean life is dying out. What do you infuriatingly leftist liberals think the limits on immigration should be??
Immigration "reform" is an incredible burden for border states. It creates an even greater flood of needy people who will simply consume more and more resources. Will it matter how much a tomato picker gets paid when there's not enough water to grow the tomatoes?
Thank you, Mexico, for doing the dirty work the U.S. has been doing alone for many decades. I don't need to know WHY you are finally stopping illegal immigration at your southern border to be sincerely grateful for it.
Immigration "reform" is an incredible burden for border states. It creates an even greater flood of needy people who will simply consume more and more resources. Will it matter how much a tomato picker gets paid when there's not enough water to grow the tomatoes?
Thank you, Mexico, for doing the dirty work the U.S. has been doing alone for many decades. I don't need to know WHY you are finally stopping illegal immigration at your southern border to be sincerely grateful for it.
34
'...fleeing poverty, violence & in some cases persecution. Huh? I thought violence was persecution. & yes, we should help to stabilize the countries of Central America, not just with financial aid, which will probably just be seized by corrupt government officials, but by aid, coupled with serious demands.
2
Wonder who caused this? Could it have something to do with America's 40+ year old "war on drugs" that only accomplished chasing the traffickers and processors out of Colombia and into Central America and Mexico? And how about NAFTA, hurting not only American workers but millions of Mexican small farmers who were also sold a pack of lies.
Reversing those won't solve all the problems that cause migration but it sure will help.
Reversing those won't solve all the problems that cause migration but it sure will help.
5
Much of the instability in Central America is due to historical US intervention in the region, including the toppling of democratically-elected leaders in countries like Guatemala, and the financing of violent insurgent groups in order to protect U.S. economic interests in the region. Any critique made on the part of my fellow commentators about the U.S.'s role in the region would be disingenuous without taking history into account. I praise the Editorial board for writing this Editorial in the face of rising xenophobia and privileged isolationism. The U.S. cannot, and should, not disregard its historical responsibility for the countless lives that have been ruined (and continue to be ruined) by its reckless historical intervention in the region.
3
I'm sorry, because we invaded Haiti during the Wilson administration (Assistant Secretary of the Navy F. D. Roosevelt had a lot to do with it) does not mean we have responsibility today. In which case, let's get reparations from Britain for brutally occupying the 13 colonies.
17
Not exactly the best comparison, considering the colonies revolted and became the United States. In any case, the Revolutionary War occurred over 200 years ago and all debts settled, whereas we are talking about a timeline of less than 50 years here. With your logic, the U.S. should be doing nothing to address poverty among Native Americans, the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, or CO2 emissions more than developing countries. Also, for your information, there is fast growing momentum among formerly colonized countries to seek reparations for past injustices, including Haiti against France for the fierce debt imposed on Haiti after achieving independence. You cannot bracket past actions from the present—that is only possible for the privileged such as you and I, being American citizens.
4
Everyone following this issue should get familiar with the facts. Look at who is on your state's entitlement rolls.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation data from 2013, New York, 18.4% Hispanic, has 31% of its non elderly Medicaid enrollees who are Hispanic.
http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/distribution-by-raceethnicity-4/
Check out your state. Wherever you are, Hispanic folks will be over represented by almost a factor of two. Why? They are the ones having the kids (often paid for by the taxpayer or as uncompensated care) and they are impoverished.
Check your state's Medicare and Food Stamp rolls. You will find the same thing.
Last I checked, we weren't short of impoverished people, actually legally present, American, impoverished people. We should be looking out for these first.
Disproportionately Hispanic. Look at how schools are doing if they have many Hispanic students.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation data from 2013, New York, 18.4% Hispanic, has 31% of its non elderly Medicaid enrollees who are Hispanic.
http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/distribution-by-raceethnicity-4/
Check out your state. Wherever you are, Hispanic folks will be over represented by almost a factor of two. Why? They are the ones having the kids (often paid for by the taxpayer or as uncompensated care) and they are impoverished.
Check your state's Medicare and Food Stamp rolls. You will find the same thing.
Last I checked, we weren't short of impoverished people, actually legally present, American, impoverished people. We should be looking out for these first.
Disproportionately Hispanic. Look at how schools are doing if they have many Hispanic students.
29
I go where the data take me. I suggest you do the same. It will elevate the discussion.
5
Well, at least they are coming in droves. That is a relief. I thought they were coming on foot.
4
The kind of help Central America needs to get back on its feet morally can be seen actively working in The International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) which again this year has triumphed over corruption.
Working with federal prosecutors investigating graft and high level payoff schemes involving top government officials recently caused the resignation of the vice-president and other administration cohorts. Moreover, the way has been set for prosecution of the President Perez Molina himself (while in office). His immunity shield was lifted by the Supreme Court only days ago.
The people of Guatemala love this and would welcome other kinds of US aid.
EG: subsidies for companies that bring jobs into the country, oversight commissions auditing and advising law enforcement, supervising and revising the criminal justice system, providing witness protection for truthful testimony to hang the big fish, medical and pharmaceutical protocols to protect the public from fraud and malpractice, collaboration with the American Bar to provide proper enforcement of ethical codes and the prosecution of lawyers who are licensed to steal, interfacing with the educational system which is a national disgrace. REAL HELP.
None of this can or will occur until the Gang's lifeline to power is cut off. Legalize drugs in the US with all the precautions. Thus, human trafficking and extortion will wind down. THEN we can manage. If not HELL is breaking loose, tearing everything up.
Working with federal prosecutors investigating graft and high level payoff schemes involving top government officials recently caused the resignation of the vice-president and other administration cohorts. Moreover, the way has been set for prosecution of the President Perez Molina himself (while in office). His immunity shield was lifted by the Supreme Court only days ago.
The people of Guatemala love this and would welcome other kinds of US aid.
EG: subsidies for companies that bring jobs into the country, oversight commissions auditing and advising law enforcement, supervising and revising the criminal justice system, providing witness protection for truthful testimony to hang the big fish, medical and pharmaceutical protocols to protect the public from fraud and malpractice, collaboration with the American Bar to provide proper enforcement of ethical codes and the prosecution of lawyers who are licensed to steal, interfacing with the educational system which is a national disgrace. REAL HELP.
None of this can or will occur until the Gang's lifeline to power is cut off. Legalize drugs in the US with all the precautions. Thus, human trafficking and extortion will wind down. THEN we can manage. If not HELL is breaking loose, tearing everything up.
2
I don't think the US should play a bigger role-- especially alone. We need a regional response. I see two problems with the US going at it alone: 1) The US is not the world's police, and 2) The US will dictate policies good for the US but not necessarily good for migrants.
3
"gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions" - that sounds like a pretty accurate description of Ferguson, Baltimore and much of Los Angeles - not just Central America. If we allow millions and millions of impoverished, needy foreign nationals into our cities we will only exacerbate the decay and deterioration already taking hold there. We encourage/compel Mexico to secure its southern border and repatriate unauthorized aliens within its territories.
18
It's sad to see so much hatred towards people trying to flee a desperate situation. In the last 60 years, the people of Central America were caught between oppressive regimes - backed by United Fruit and the like -, militant insurgents, and rampant gang violence. Is anybody surprised that so many thousands of people try to flee from Central American countries every year?
This is a problem that's been a long time coming. And while US foreign/drug policy and corporate greed didn't cause all of it, they certainly made a bad situation worse. The least the US can do now is try to be a part of the solution and work with the countries of Central America to strengthen their democratic institutions. Outsourcing border defense to Mexico solves nothing.
This is a problem that's been a long time coming. And while US foreign/drug policy and corporate greed didn't cause all of it, they certainly made a bad situation worse. The least the US can do now is try to be a part of the solution and work with the countries of Central America to strengthen their democratic institutions. Outsourcing border defense to Mexico solves nothing.
6
How much immigration by unskilled foreign language speakers is enough for you people?
How much of my money, in your generosity, are you prepared to give them to give them "free" food and shelter, as returning vets have to turn to private charities to find work and therapy the government won't provide because its too busy spending billions in Ukraine and Israel?
How much of my money, in your generosity, are you prepared to give them to give them "free" food and shelter, as returning vets have to turn to private charities to find work and therapy the government won't provide because its too busy spending billions in Ukraine and Israel?
19
Perhaps instead of fighting an unwinable war in the Middle East we could do something about the problems in the Central American region, or maybe just maybe getting the UN involved if they're not too busy doing whatever they do these days.
3
Let's clean up the dirty regimes in these countries. We can't feed our own people and now we are the world's inkeepers for illegals? I don't think so. Perhaps if Obama didn't appologize to the Mexican President and scolded him instead for not doing anything about his country's problems we wouldn't have this problem. These people should be turned away this country is busting at the seems and we are supposed to take in more? It's ridiculous.
16
So send in our troops or CIA to enforce US ideals? Let's not.
3
Trump just announced his run for president. First on his agenda: build a wall along the entire Mexican border. Say what you will, but it's time to do exactly that.
18
"During the first nine months of 2014, the Mexican government, which has a lengthy asylum application process, approved only 16 percent of claims filed by Central Americans."
Did NYT staff consider that perhaps only 16 percent deserve refugee status and the rest are simply economic opportunists, (not true asylum seekers)?
Thought not.
===
"That has meant that fewer Central Americans who have reason to seek asylum are getting a chance to make their case."
First of all, most of these people are economic opportunists, not refugees.
Almost every one of them can apply for a Visa to come to the US... they must simply apply for a Visa at the local US Embassy or Consulate
The correct way is not to embark on a dangerous journey and come here illegally and expect that we will simply absorb you.
We have a right to decide who comes to our country, just as they have a right to decide who comes to ours.
If we want to help, we can simply increase the number of work visas allowed to Central Americans, and have them come here legally.
But all illegal entrants should be rounded up and sent back to their country. This will encourage them to do things the correct and legal way.
There is no acute urgent crisis in any of these Central American countries. They simply have a bad economy and gang violence. But so do many American Cities.
Did NYT staff consider that perhaps only 16 percent deserve refugee status and the rest are simply economic opportunists, (not true asylum seekers)?
Thought not.
===
"That has meant that fewer Central Americans who have reason to seek asylum are getting a chance to make their case."
First of all, most of these people are economic opportunists, not refugees.
Almost every one of them can apply for a Visa to come to the US... they must simply apply for a Visa at the local US Embassy or Consulate
The correct way is not to embark on a dangerous journey and come here illegally and expect that we will simply absorb you.
We have a right to decide who comes to our country, just as they have a right to decide who comes to ours.
If we want to help, we can simply increase the number of work visas allowed to Central Americans, and have them come here legally.
But all illegal entrants should be rounded up and sent back to their country. This will encourage them to do things the correct and legal way.
There is no acute urgent crisis in any of these Central American countries. They simply have a bad economy and gang violence. But so do many American Cities.
24
I’ve been told that Central American and Mexican parents have such large families that they have to emphasize cooperation among their children to the point where individuality is largely ignored. Perhaps it’s this attitude of “go along, get along” that deters Mexicans and Central Americans from stopping the everyday government corruption that they experience.
If the Church would allow Catholic parents to use artificial means of birth control, then parents could limit the number of children they have to the number they are able to raise as individuals rather than as a large group in “cookie cutter” fashion. If every child was given a fair share of their parents’ time, attention, and resources, then he or she would have a better chance of succeeding in life. Mexicans and Central Americans would stand up for better government instead of just trying to “ go with the flow’.
Isn’t it time for Mexico and Central America to put more value on educating children and on developing their countries than on having large families?
If the Church would allow Catholic parents to use artificial means of birth control, then parents could limit the number of children they have to the number they are able to raise as individuals rather than as a large group in “cookie cutter” fashion. If every child was given a fair share of their parents’ time, attention, and resources, then he or she would have a better chance of succeeding in life. Mexicans and Central Americans would stand up for better government instead of just trying to “ go with the flow’.
Isn’t it time for Mexico and Central America to put more value on educating children and on developing their countries than on having large families?
15
" the Mexican government, which has a lengthy asylum application process, approved only 16 percent of claims filed by Central Americans".
Sounds like we could learn something from them.
Sounds like we could learn something from them.
31
Like Europe, the United States, Canada, and Mexico need to coordinate to form a joint response to this issue. We can barely afford to provide for our own, and unchecked immigration has already overwhelmed social services and supply of necessary goods like housing. Imagine if all of the money spent on free services for illegals was spent on subsidizing college tuition, healthcare, or child care costs instead; how much better off would the average American taxpayer be?
This is nothing against the migrants themselves or Latin Americans, who are good people in a bad situation. We've just reached the limit of how many we can take in.
This is nothing against the migrants themselves or Latin Americans, who are good people in a bad situation. We've just reached the limit of how many we can take in.
35
In reply to AC who says, "We've just reached the limit of how many we can take in."
1. We reached the limit decades ago.
2. If we offer legal status to the people who have already come here illegally, they will bring in their relatives. I can already hear the arguments they would make.
They would say they need their spouses and children. Then they would bring their parents to watch the children. Next they would find some reason to bring their siblings and cousins. If the government said these people could not move here, they would simply bring them in as visitors and then wait for the next round of amnesty. All of these people would need food stamps, medical care, housing, and everything else our taxpayers would provide.
1. We reached the limit decades ago.
2. If we offer legal status to the people who have already come here illegally, they will bring in their relatives. I can already hear the arguments they would make.
They would say they need their spouses and children. Then they would bring their parents to watch the children. Next they would find some reason to bring their siblings and cousins. If the government said these people could not move here, they would simply bring them in as visitors and then wait for the next round of amnesty. All of these people would need food stamps, medical care, housing, and everything else our taxpayers would provide.
15
It is surely in the US' interests to help. But, the scale of assistance required -- remember, the problems in the source countries aren't just about a failed crop or other short-term phenomena, and are rather around deep corruption, failed economies, and pervasive crime and disorder -- would probably need to be substantial in size and thoroughly invasive in nature, akin to a Marshall Plan. The prickliness of these nations in all matters "el Norte" really prohibits meaningful aid at that scale, however well-intended. So, that basically leaves us throwing dollars at a problem for no purpose other than salving our conscience, which has never worked. And draining the countries of their people to leave the bad guys only isn't workable either. It is a shame, but so are Yemen, Syria, CAE, ...
20
Well put. Suffix what you have already said, foreign engagement akin to nation (re)building in these countries would earn US nothing more than animosity of us being another colonial power trampling on their sovereignty. It's a no-win situation.
7
The fact is, we cannot solve the problems in Latin America. It is cultural in nature, and as we have discovered first in Viet Nam and later in Afghanistan and Iraq, Jeffersonian democracy cannot be created on top of any culture that was 1,000s of years in the making and does not have the necessary traditions already in place.
I think we can and should help our our neighbors to establish the necessary institutions and cultural values, and perhaps over the long run, they will establish their own ways of coping. Look at Cuba (I just got back from there). For all its flaws and its repressive government, it is far, far better run than most other latin American countries. Good medical care, no drug problem, universal literacy, adequate food and housing for all. Many of them would have better opportunities in the US, but would be worse off in any other latin American country.
We should continue to allow a moderate, controlled, selective amount of immigration. But America, and every country in the world has the right to control who may enter and choose to live there. We have the right to do this to preserve our environment, the position of our working citizens, our taxpayers, and our very culture (flawed though it is).
I think we can and should help our our neighbors to establish the necessary institutions and cultural values, and perhaps over the long run, they will establish their own ways of coping. Look at Cuba (I just got back from there). For all its flaws and its repressive government, it is far, far better run than most other latin American countries. Good medical care, no drug problem, universal literacy, adequate food and housing for all. Many of them would have better opportunities in the US, but would be worse off in any other latin American country.
We should continue to allow a moderate, controlled, selective amount of immigration. But America, and every country in the world has the right to control who may enter and choose to live there. We have the right to do this to preserve our environment, the position of our working citizens, our taxpayers, and our very culture (flawed though it is).
63
Our culture has been changed, and to our detriment.
We once welcomed immigrants. America was built by the hard work and dreams of people whole came here, the dreamers, from around the world. But then, 100 years ago, millions of Jews and Italians, lacking formal education, poured into New York. Republicans disliked them, made it difficult to immigrate, and damaged America, keeping generations of dreamers in the shadows or out of the country altogether.
With the evidence of accomplishments of the children and grandchildren of those once- hated Jews and Italians, we can only imagine the scope of contributions to America that have been lost by changing our culture from one that welcomed to one that belittles immigrants.
We once welcomed immigrants. America was built by the hard work and dreams of people whole came here, the dreamers, from around the world. But then, 100 years ago, millions of Jews and Italians, lacking formal education, poured into New York. Republicans disliked them, made it difficult to immigrate, and damaged America, keeping generations of dreamers in the shadows or out of the country altogether.
With the evidence of accomplishments of the children and grandchildren of those once- hated Jews and Italians, we can only imagine the scope of contributions to America that have been lost by changing our culture from one that welcomed to one that belittles immigrants.
2
Can't believe you're actually blaming the Republicans. Isn't Obama still in charge? And you seem to be forgetting that in the past immigrants entered LEGALLY and didn't expect a handout of government services.
10
I do not disagree. But one can get too much of a good thing. America is only 5% of the world's population, so without some fair limitations, the potential for being overwhelmed is obvious. Surely, you would not support having no limits at all? This would only accomplish evening out the misery and poverty in the world.
We do welcome immigrants, perhaps even more than before, since as you note, many discriminated against and ridiculed them. But some only welcome immigrants because they want to abuse them, and use them to force down wages.
We do welcome immigrants, perhaps even more than before, since as you note, many discriminated against and ridiculed them. But some only welcome immigrants because they want to abuse them, and use them to force down wages.
8
Let's me get this straight: the Mexican government is putting forth a huge effort to stop illegal immigration along its southern border? The nerve of them!
Don't they know that Guatemalans and Hondurans are only coming to do jobs Mexican won't deign to do? Do they really think they'll reduce wages, increase crime and social unrest, and be a drag on already meager social services? Don't they know that the border is an artificial construct and that people have been crossing the border for generations? Don't they know that the human race is one big family?
Don't they know that Guatemalans and Hondurans are only coming to do jobs Mexican won't deign to do? Do they really think they'll reduce wages, increase crime and social unrest, and be a drag on already meager social services? Don't they know that the border is an artificial construct and that people have been crossing the border for generations? Don't they know that the human race is one big family?
25
Letting the problems fester will inevitably mean that people seeking safety and a better life will keep heading north in large numbers, which will continue to drive up the cost of keeping them out.
Very apt for our failure to enforce immigration law--a failure that has resulted in 11 million plus illegal residents, constituting, in effect--according to Krugman-- a permanent novoting class of unskilled-worker residents and families.
Until we make it clear to current illegal residents that they will not, forever, be welcome here, they will be inclined to stay--and their emulators will be encouraged to follow in their footsteps.
We need a clear policy statement: Legal immigration? OK. Illegal immigration? No way.
Very apt for our failure to enforce immigration law--a failure that has resulted in 11 million plus illegal residents, constituting, in effect--according to Krugman-- a permanent novoting class of unskilled-worker residents and families.
Until we make it clear to current illegal residents that they will not, forever, be welcome here, they will be inclined to stay--and their emulators will be encouraged to follow in their footsteps.
We need a clear policy statement: Legal immigration? OK. Illegal immigration? No way.
31
It's amazing to see New Yokers stridently opposed to immigration in these comments. Yet the largest immigration into the U.S. ever seen were their own ancestors. U.S. policy in Central America has demolished their culture and safety. We've exploited them for over 100 years. Let's take some responsibility for helping them out of a crisis caused by Americans from United Fruit to the Reagan era wars and the ongoing war on drugs.
4
How many more millions would you like this country to take in? Perhaps you have room in your home. We cannot feed nor can we house people who were born in this country and now you think it is our responsibility to take these illegals in? No discernable skills, they can't speak the language no immunization records to speak of, so sure why don't we take them all in.
12
unless you're gonna put them up in your house - stop acting noble by offering yet more of my money to help yet more unskilled immgirants pile in during a Recession.
How about fixing those countries education systems first?
How about fixing those countries education systems first?
10
Central Americans are still seeking to migrate to the United States in droves, but a greater percentage are now being turned back in Mexico. Let's have - Mexican nationals are still seeking to migrate to the United States in droves, but a greater percentage are now being turned back in Mexico. And, don't forget, WE can stop them at the border, too.
11
These are people in great need. They can't walk here! We need the immigration and we could pick up thousands with our airforce and the planes of other nations. We should do it NOW!
2
A sane immigration policy and a closed border to anyone who seeks to bypass the legal process for access to the US would cost little and benefit everyone.
Those not willing to go through the process would look elsewhere, ending the migration. If someone told you with certainty that you would be denied entry to somewhere would you still attempt to go?
Those not willing to go through the process would look elsewhere, ending the migration. If someone told you with certainty that you would be denied entry to somewhere would you still attempt to go?
24
Why don't the Central Americans move to South American countries where, we read, that life is better, and with somewhat better governments? Why are we the lucky ones?
29
They're doing just that, Janet. Asylum applications from Hondurans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans have increased by over 700% in recent years in the nearby countries of Mexico, Panama, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Belize. See http://unhcrwashington.org/children. But those small countries can't absorb all the refugees, and many flee toward the U.S. where they may already have relatives. Like all countries, the U.S. is obligated under both domestic and international law to accept applications for asylum from people fleeing persecution in their home countries. We should welcome these people, in the spirit of our proud historical tradition of offering asylum to the downtrodden, instead of turning them back, or detaining women and children in harsh, prison-like conditions like we have been doing.
8
Asylum applicants are supposed to apply to the first safe country they reach, not continue asylum shopping to get to a country with generous benefits, - namely the US.
The first safe country is MEXICO. they should be applying for asylum there. - coming to the US is asylum shopping, and we should discourage it, by sending these people back to Mexico to make their asylum application there.
The first safe country is MEXICO. they should be applying for asylum there. - coming to the US is asylum shopping, and we should discourage it, by sending these people back to Mexico to make their asylum application there.
18
"The United States can afford to play a bigger, more constructive role in helping Central American nations."
The United States government and its business interests, in cahoots with the rich elites of Central America have been helping to oppress the peoples of these lands for over 100 years. Its time for them to solve their own problems and stay out of their business and send undocumented migrants immediately back to their own countries and letting them get their own house in order. We need to speed up the deportation process of turning back undocumented migrants, with no education, no skills and looking for a handout from US taxapayers.
The United States government and its business interests, in cahoots with the rich elites of Central America have been helping to oppress the peoples of these lands for over 100 years. Its time for them to solve their own problems and stay out of their business and send undocumented migrants immediately back to their own countries and letting them get their own house in order. We need to speed up the deportation process of turning back undocumented migrants, with no education, no skills and looking for a handout from US taxapayers.
26
Often Americans - particularly Congressional Republicans - do not examine some of the contributions of the US to the causes for the instability and violence in Latin America: our past military aid to corrupt dictators and their armies, the our trade agreements which bankrupt native farmers, our appetite for drugs, and even our deportation policies which have sent gangsters with American connections back to the drug cartels. The immigration problem with never be solved if we don't look beyond our borders.
3
Punishing law abiding Americans isn't the solution either. Any migrants must be told that they need to learn English, use birth control and avoid any kind of welfare use. The people in question are not children and should not be treated as such.
6
So this unmanageable influx suddenly improved last year when the USA discussed policy and border enforcement with Mexico. I suggest we continue this discussion. Mexico is a large wealthy country culturally more related to these poor 3rd world places than USA, and controlling the access. Mexico has a clear interest in NO poor migrants from the south within its own borders, as well as pretty well managed migration policy.
Obviously the solution has a lot to do with recognizing the historical injustices (many of which we over a certain age can well remember from our Reagan contra days), getting policies in place which encourage economic development, low birth rates, education in Central America.
Shutting up those Central American politicians and church leaders who actually encourage migration to the US - why do they do this ? Its a cynical win-win for them, these poor suckers pay with body and soul to migrate then send money back, their properties get given to govt and church, its disgusting, happened for years in Mexico.
Of course the US could benefit from implementing the same type of lo birth rate/education/development policies in Mississippi, Alabama, inner cities. Time for the USA to start to work together as a nation, to work with the functional politicians/leaders in other countries and make a better hemisphere.
Obviously the solution has a lot to do with recognizing the historical injustices (many of which we over a certain age can well remember from our Reagan contra days), getting policies in place which encourage economic development, low birth rates, education in Central America.
Shutting up those Central American politicians and church leaders who actually encourage migration to the US - why do they do this ? Its a cynical win-win for them, these poor suckers pay with body and soul to migrate then send money back, their properties get given to govt and church, its disgusting, happened for years in Mexico.
Of course the US could benefit from implementing the same type of lo birth rate/education/development policies in Mississippi, Alabama, inner cities. Time for the USA to start to work together as a nation, to work with the functional politicians/leaders in other countries and make a better hemisphere.
8
Two points: First, the United States has all but forgotten Central America since 9/11. It is not an important focus of our foreign policy as it should be because the attention has been on Afghanistan, Iraq, and now ISIS. Clearly that has been a mistake (to ignore Central America) and the unintended consequences are two-fold: 1) China has actively stepped in to fill the void by gifting new stadiums in return for exploitation of national resources and 2) our borders are being overrun by people escaping poverty and crime. Second, we cannot talk about raising the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 without also having a conversation about first securing our borders. One can only imagine the increased flow of illegal immigrants from Central America into the United States when they learn they can make more in one hour than in an entire day.
10
How come this bunch gets to be called "migrants"? The ones sneaking into our country get referred to as "illegal immigrants" or "illegal aliens". One comforting thought: at least Mexico is turning some of them back at the Mexican southern border. That will save us from gaining a few. But it will not be long before our areas and our systems no longer work because of the cost and the volume of "illegals". Then what? Collapse? No borders? Unlimited and uncontrolled numbers swarming into our country? This is a very good time to be very old.
24
No borders is exactly what leftist chicano movements have advocated all along. What they don't understand is that we do not live on magic dirt here. The reason this country is so great compared to what's available south of the border is that a government by the people and for the people works BEST. If our own citizens want to argue this, they should try living in countries south of here, as I have done. They will see the light soon enough. This American government is what the illegal immigrant lusts after. And that is the very last thing leftist chicano groups will admit to.
1
So, somehow Mexico is able to protect its southern border, but the United States is not?
I guess we're lucky that Mexico is doing our job for us. That way, we don't look like heartless xenophobes. Like with most other things, we've managed to outsource that to another country. Good for us!
The US has no obligation to accept immigrants that do not bring positive, constructive influences into our country and upon our culture. By allowing unchecked migration from countries with high poverty and widespread ignorance (i.e. lack of education), we are hurting ourselves and, more importantly, our children, who will have to live in the future we are building.
We have enough poverty of our own. Adding to it helps no one and hurts those that are native to our country, as it taxes resources and takes away from our own.
Oh, I care about America and Americans. I guess I must be one of those heartless xenophobes, not to mention a racist and an isolationist, eh?
No, not at all. I just don't understand why other country's failing are our responsibility to fix, or we must accept those who will eventually bring us down to the level of the countries they've escaped from.
If America doesn't start thinking about itself and protecting its borders, we will have no one to blame but ourselves, when our children wake up in the third-world country we are making for them.
I guess we're lucky that Mexico is doing our job for us. That way, we don't look like heartless xenophobes. Like with most other things, we've managed to outsource that to another country. Good for us!
The US has no obligation to accept immigrants that do not bring positive, constructive influences into our country and upon our culture. By allowing unchecked migration from countries with high poverty and widespread ignorance (i.e. lack of education), we are hurting ourselves and, more importantly, our children, who will have to live in the future we are building.
We have enough poverty of our own. Adding to it helps no one and hurts those that are native to our country, as it taxes resources and takes away from our own.
Oh, I care about America and Americans. I guess I must be one of those heartless xenophobes, not to mention a racist and an isolationist, eh?
No, not at all. I just don't understand why other country's failing are our responsibility to fix, or we must accept those who will eventually bring us down to the level of the countries they've escaped from.
If America doesn't start thinking about itself and protecting its borders, we will have no one to blame but ourselves, when our children wake up in the third-world country we are making for them.
43
My last several comments were not published, but here's another try at political procrastination.
Short of invading these countries to re-make them in our image, the cost-effective method is to not let them export their problems to us.
Frankly, the U.S. deserves better than to be a blow-out valve for Mexico, Central America. Meaning, they're under no political pressure to change, because that pressure walks north rather than confront the corrupt powers who've failed to govern. We're so conceited as to assume we've the solution to most of the worlds problems, or are the cause thereof.
Civilizations fail without borders. Cultures have customs. Cities used to have walls. Cells have membranes. Ships have hulls. This is basic stuff.
Short of invading these countries to re-make them in our image, the cost-effective method is to not let them export their problems to us.
Frankly, the U.S. deserves better than to be a blow-out valve for Mexico, Central America. Meaning, they're under no political pressure to change, because that pressure walks north rather than confront the corrupt powers who've failed to govern. We're so conceited as to assume we've the solution to most of the worlds problems, or are the cause thereof.
Civilizations fail without borders. Cultures have customs. Cities used to have walls. Cells have membranes. Ships have hulls. This is basic stuff.
28
Uncontrolled immigration acts as a relief valve for the corrupt nations to our south, while expanding the suffering of our nation's poor.
if these migrations were prevented, pressure for fair democratic societies would build until revolutions would displace the corrupt fat cats.
if these migrations were prevented, pressure for fair democratic societies would build until revolutions would displace the corrupt fat cats.
24
"Just Thinking" got it exactly right America has served as a relief valve for the corrupt, wealthy central and south american families who essentially have had slave labor for generations. Their uber lavish lifestyles have long been dependent on a complicit America who enjoys the steady influx of cheap labor to keep the wages of our own working class at a subsistence level." Just thinking" also correctly points out that these countries would otherwise have civil unrest; I would like too add that there already exists the seeds of revolution all over the world Egypt is the most glaring recent example of our foreign policy at work but this time it is as much to assure the safety of the Saudi Monarchy and Israel as it was to enable the big mining companies in the sixties[in south america] or big oil all over the world to continue ripping off the host countries and their people. Of course today if you are in the luxury real estate business in New York, Miami or London this has been a boom time as the corrupt one percent flee their countries; a fascinating article in the Financial Times this week adds to the scenario as "panic rooms " for the uber rich to hide in when under siege have become the latest " must have" when remodeling ; that does help explain the six and seven figure a year security benefits given to retiring senior bankers and their ilk .
1
“…Thousands of desperate Central Americans fleeing violence, poverty and, in some cases, persecution, are continuing to embark on perilous journeys north. A growing share, though, are being turned back at Mexico’s southern border.
‘The root causes of migration haven’t gone away,’ said Maureen Meyer, an expert on migration trends who has analyzed recent data from immigration authorities in Mexico and the United States. ‘Things are certainly not getting any better’…”
___
Failed government/leadership policies AND birthplace circumstance; NOT America’s problem.
‘The root causes of migration haven’t gone away,’ said Maureen Meyer, an expert on migration trends who has analyzed recent data from immigration authorities in Mexico and the United States. ‘Things are certainly not getting any better’…”
___
Failed government/leadership policies AND birthplace circumstance; NOT America’s problem.
17
From what I've been reading from various sources, we should develop deep ties with at least some Central American countries. The U.S. people who make up the generation that is just now starting to retire in large numbers have inadequate savings and too little in their Social Secuurity checks to be economically secure. Mexico and more southern countries in the Americas would provide a much cheaper way to retire. When we get to the height of the retirement explosion that we are facing, enough retirees might choose to go south, leaving room and resources for a greater number of immigrants to the U.S. If we help secure and stabilize South American countries starting now, we might all benefit greatly in the future.
1
Sorry, forgot to say, this is for real. There is already an ex-pat group or two in Mexico because they can't afford to live here. Some retired, some working there.
1
So all the old people should move to places others are desperate to get away from, to "open up" the US to more immigrants from Central America?
1
You often hear the common platitude that the U.S. is a nation of immigrants, so we need to keep in place the liberal immigration policies that somehow "define" us. But, in fact, for most of our history immigration was strictly regulated by numerical quotas.
In any event, if it wasn't true a hundred years ago, it is true today that obtaining U.S. citizenship is a great privilege and opportunity for the seeker, and so we can and ought to be very picky in who we admit. Admission to the U.S. based on the degree of political instability or impoverishment in a person's home country doesn't seem like a guiding rationale that is in the best interest of the American people and our posterity.
In any event, if it wasn't true a hundred years ago, it is true today that obtaining U.S. citizenship is a great privilege and opportunity for the seeker, and so we can and ought to be very picky in who we admit. Admission to the U.S. based on the degree of political instability or impoverishment in a person's home country doesn't seem like a guiding rationale that is in the best interest of the American people and our posterity.
25
Back in the day of formation of US via migration, there was no welfare state, i.e. no social security disability, no medicaid, no food stamps, only hard work or charity. Eliminate the welfare state today and the migration will automatically transform. Alternatively, keep the welfare state, and control migration. Both can't co-exist. Is this concept so hard to understand?
1
The best way to solve this is to promote economic development in those countries. Nothing stops migration like a good job. I say that from an immigrant family from the Caribbean.
7
With an actual unemployment figure of around 20%, not the 5.5% the government wants you to believe, I think our focus should be on jobs for people who started out in the US, first. Then, we'll talk about the other when real full employment is accomplished.
8
Wait a minute. You mean to say that the meetings Barak Obama had with Central American leaders on this subject last year have not produced the results the US needs? And such nice pictures published of them all looking pleased at the time, too.
I say: Cut their funds off. Period.
It isn't like the US funds they receive are used to handle their situations anyway. So, grade school textbooks and birth control should be all they get from us.
See how that works. You can't become oligarchs from appropriating textbooks and birth control.
I say: Cut their funds off. Period.
It isn't like the US funds they receive are used to handle their situations anyway. So, grade school textbooks and birth control should be all they get from us.
See how that works. You can't become oligarchs from appropriating textbooks and birth control.
18
Back when our border was easier to cross, Mexico figured they might as well make some money as travel agent, transportation company, and toll collector. Now that it's harder to get into the US, you think Mexico is going to let them in there, to just stay? Right.
We should be commending this action by Mexico. Of course conditions are bad in a lot of Central American countries. They are bad in many, many countries around the world. Is this country to be the social worker to the entire world?
We should be commending this action by Mexico. Of course conditions are bad in a lot of Central American countries. They are bad in many, many countries around the world. Is this country to be the social worker to the entire world?
22
Being in Monterrey, just 100 miles from the almost closed border to Texas, I see the consecuences everyday in beggars on the streets. They come from Central America with hope of crossing the border and end up in worst hardship.
I have been wondering a lot and asking a lot of questions. The only chance I see for releif, that really works, is to set up several Hong Kong like leased for a 100 years territories. Places where the rule of the law, probably in an English like way and language be set up. That way investment could flow and be protected, giving releif by giving the people a chance at oportunity and solution to their ordeal.
It is sad, their culture has not evolved in a positive way, the have not built strong societies nor governments. Their lives in there are horribly dangerous. It is a jungle in there.
I have been wondering a lot and asking a lot of questions. The only chance I see for releif, that really works, is to set up several Hong Kong like leased for a 100 years territories. Places where the rule of the law, probably in an English like way and language be set up. That way investment could flow and be protected, giving releif by giving the people a chance at oportunity and solution to their ordeal.
It is sad, their culture has not evolved in a positive way, the have not built strong societies nor governments. Their lives in there are horribly dangerous. It is a jungle in there.
9
The festering problems in Central America are largely the result of era when we North Americans decided to emulate Spanish Conquistadors, and found aristocracies of wealth, centered upon commodity economies, hence the political entities which benefit from this process have become known to the world as Banana Republics.
Commoditization, does not create societies which share the wealth, and the citizens of such countries are largely irrelevant to the production of wealth, which is why democracy seldom flourishes in Commoditized Economies.
The modern expression of the will to commoditize to the advantage of the few is to be found in the neoliberal demand for modern Western economies to reform, which of course has nothing to do with reform as it is commonly understood, but rather reform refers to the process by which societies adopt the demands of the few for the internal devaluation of labor.
Not only will the plight of Central American Workers continue to fester because illegal labor is cheap labor, but the initiatives currently embraced by Mr. Obama and his Republican friends to impose trade pacts like TPP, which elevate the private sector perhaps even beyond the power of the Sovereign to run economies to the advantage of that chosen few, may be imposed upon us in the near future.
The elites which have purchased the representatives of modern Western Economies will twist the law to make a trap for fools if we let them. TPP is a warning of what is to come.
Commoditization, does not create societies which share the wealth, and the citizens of such countries are largely irrelevant to the production of wealth, which is why democracy seldom flourishes in Commoditized Economies.
The modern expression of the will to commoditize to the advantage of the few is to be found in the neoliberal demand for modern Western economies to reform, which of course has nothing to do with reform as it is commonly understood, but rather reform refers to the process by which societies adopt the demands of the few for the internal devaluation of labor.
Not only will the plight of Central American Workers continue to fester because illegal labor is cheap labor, but the initiatives currently embraced by Mr. Obama and his Republican friends to impose trade pacts like TPP, which elevate the private sector perhaps even beyond the power of the Sovereign to run economies to the advantage of that chosen few, may be imposed upon us in the near future.
The elites which have purchased the representatives of modern Western Economies will twist the law to make a trap for fools if we let them. TPP is a warning of what is to come.
15
Asylum seekers no that if they obtain refugee status, they immediately qualify for years of welfare. They also know that if they have a child in the US, the child qualifies for eighteen years of welfare.
Not a formula for getting the best and the brightest, but just the opposite.
Luckily, none of the asylum seekers would ever lie about the reasons they are seeking refugee status, right?
Not a formula for getting the best and the brightest, but just the opposite.
Luckily, none of the asylum seekers would ever lie about the reasons they are seeking refugee status, right?
18
Two words to help global crises in every poor country- from Central America to African countries to Somalia, to Yemen, etc. birth control.
There are simply too many people and not enough water, food, jobs. We are already out of control. With fewer people, perhaps the next generations will have a chance. Right now, human life is very cheap making humans targets for illegal smuggling, human trafficking, and of course, the ever popular, suicide bomber and cannon fodder. We need to help promote a world wide campaign for smaller families and predicate any US aid on the result of having fewer kids. BTW, we should also do it in this country. Religion usually gets in the way of common sense practices, but perhaps money does trump all.
There are simply too many people and not enough water, food, jobs. We are already out of control. With fewer people, perhaps the next generations will have a chance. Right now, human life is very cheap making humans targets for illegal smuggling, human trafficking, and of course, the ever popular, suicide bomber and cannon fodder. We need to help promote a world wide campaign for smaller families and predicate any US aid on the result of having fewer kids. BTW, we should also do it in this country. Religion usually gets in the way of common sense practices, but perhaps money does trump all.
14
"Yet American politicians have shown little interest in devoting resources to address the underlying reasons Central Americans continue to head north. They include gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions."
Ah yes. The central problem as the editorial board sees it, is that the US has not seen fit to solve Central America's problems. And this as the Times' editors decry daily our inability to solve our own gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions.
Can opinion writers never learn that sometimes there are problems that the US can neither solve nor relieve?
Ah yes. The central problem as the editorial board sees it, is that the US has not seen fit to solve Central America's problems. And this as the Times' editors decry daily our inability to solve our own gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions.
Can opinion writers never learn that sometimes there are problems that the US can neither solve nor relieve?
27
If we can't relieve and solve them, then the current situation will continue. Period.
Reagan's amnesty started the destruction of the burgeoning black middle class by allowing three million illegal immigrants to drive down wages.
Both political parties have continued to support the massive influx of cheap labor, whether from illegal immigrants or work visa programs, even though the past 40+ years have proven that low skilled immigrants are net takers from the economy.
The only people who do not understand that the oversupply of labor cannot be fixed by bringing in more labor are politicians, tenured professors, economists, and Liberal columnists, since their own jobs are not threatened.
Both political parties have continued to support the massive influx of cheap labor, whether from illegal immigrants or work visa programs, even though the past 40+ years have proven that low skilled immigrants are net takers from the economy.
The only people who do not understand that the oversupply of labor cannot be fixed by bringing in more labor are politicians, tenured professors, economists, and Liberal columnists, since their own jobs are not threatened.
28
The studies that purport to show that illegal immigrants don't have a cost arrive at this conclusion solely because they ignore the cost of the kids, born US citizens thanks to the continuing lunacy of Birthright Citizenship. Once you include the kids, who only exist here through the illegal presence of the parents, the net cost soars.
5
The United States poured billions of dollars into Afghanistan and Iraq along with many officials military and otherwise. We do seem to have transformed those countries. Is there really any reason to believe that the United States can change the nature of Central American countries other than by occupy it and staying there for years?
2
Beyond suggesting that some folks need to take a good hard look at the poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty and maybe figure out what that torch is for, the lack of knowledge about history or maybe the plain refusal to admit it just amazes me.
i mean to say, tripping lightly past the moral issue (way to dump on the poor, Christians!) it's not as though this country hasn't been mucking about in Latin America for a century and a half at least. We've atuck them with our drug problems, politics, cheap labor needs, plantations, and then we expect they'll just do fine?
i don't expect the Right to believe this. But a good serious Marshall Plan would go a long way to solving their problems, and ours too. cheaply.
i mean to say, tripping lightly past the moral issue (way to dump on the poor, Christians!) it's not as though this country hasn't been mucking about in Latin America for a century and a half at least. We've atuck them with our drug problems, politics, cheap labor needs, plantations, and then we expect they'll just do fine?
i don't expect the Right to believe this. But a good serious Marshall Plan would go a long way to solving their problems, and ours too. cheaply.
11
The problems came from the good old USA. Our drug war and our neglect of immigrants created gangs that we deported to Central America. This is our problem and we need to solve it.
3
Not to mention lax border and immigration enforcement. We need modern, comprehensive visa tracking. We need 100% e-verify enforcement.
8
The U.S. has the highest rate of incarceration and homelessness of all of the industrialized countries - THAT is a legitimate problem that needs addressing.
No the US CAN'T "afford to play a bigger, more constructive role." This is the liberal version of nation building. And we don't need to asylum to become easier for someone to claim. Currently we can't process the overflow of illegal immigrants and the policy suggestions that the NYT suggests are expensive and have not worked before (once people arrive to the US they never really leave).
It is amazing to me that the NYT would claim that we can do more even when they state that the Customs and Border budget increased from $5.9B to more than $12Bn this year. Then in other articles they decry the lack of investment in infrastructure in NYC and the nation, lack of adequate dollars for mental health treatment, more education dollars, more "assistance" for .... well you name it.
Who pays? If I'm going to pay taxes I'd like them focused on my and my fellow citizens and their needs, rather than ramping up a bureaucracy to aid those that are not citizens.
It is amazing to me that the NYT would claim that we can do more even when they state that the Customs and Border budget increased from $5.9B to more than $12Bn this year. Then in other articles they decry the lack of investment in infrastructure in NYC and the nation, lack of adequate dollars for mental health treatment, more education dollars, more "assistance" for .... well you name it.
Who pays? If I'm going to pay taxes I'd like them focused on my and my fellow citizens and their needs, rather than ramping up a bureaucracy to aid those that are not citizens.
30
“…The Obama administration asked Congress for $1 billion for the effort, arguing that the border crisis last year underscored the severity of problems in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, the countries where most of the migrants come from.
Last week, congressional appropriators in the House of Representatives marking up the bill that allocates foreign aid set aside less than $300 million for Central America. The lion’s share of the financing was approved for security initiatives. That is extremely shortsighted...”
___
In this more than ⅔ increase in over current appropriations, how much is earmarked to special interest initiatives set out to the liberal agenda versus a clean bill?
Last week, congressional appropriators in the House of Representatives marking up the bill that allocates foreign aid set aside less than $300 million for Central America. The lion’s share of the financing was approved for security initiatives. That is extremely shortsighted...”
___
In this more than ⅔ increase in over current appropriations, how much is earmarked to special interest initiatives set out to the liberal agenda versus a clean bill?
5
So - invasion of the US from the south, invasion of Europe from the Mediterranean, with the migrants holding up threatening signs that indicate they think they have a proscriptive right to get into Europe; the numbers are now astronomical of people who just want out of their own countries and into far more successful and richer ones where, despite the fact that it is clear that the populations of those countries do - not - want - them streaming in, competing for low-wage jobs, demanding work benefits, housing benefits, pressuring available housing, medical services, education . . . further shredding formerly coherent cultures, and eventually displacing the original ethnic populations of those countries . . .
And the TIMES's only answer is the West must do more! America must do more! There is never the slightest suggestion that these tens of millions get together and try fixing their own countries. So much easier to simply move into someone else's home and redecorate it to their own specs a generation or so down the road.
Islamist groups in Denmark pressuring Danish Muslims from voting (they got in through "asylum"). Sweden's Malmo looks like Beirut. Muslim French youth burnt and looted Jewish shops in Sarcelles last summer. Britain's electorate is screaming to reduce immigration as it is, Tower Hamlets and East London as the poster children for why, and UK Muslim girls are being taken out of the UK in summer to get "cut".
Host populations? They don't qualify for sympathy.
And the TIMES's only answer is the West must do more! America must do more! There is never the slightest suggestion that these tens of millions get together and try fixing their own countries. So much easier to simply move into someone else's home and redecorate it to their own specs a generation or so down the road.
Islamist groups in Denmark pressuring Danish Muslims from voting (they got in through "asylum"). Sweden's Malmo looks like Beirut. Muslim French youth burnt and looted Jewish shops in Sarcelles last summer. Britain's electorate is screaming to reduce immigration as it is, Tower Hamlets and East London as the poster children for why, and UK Muslim girls are being taken out of the UK in summer to get "cut".
Host populations? They don't qualify for sympathy.
35
THE TIP OF OUR NOSE Once again, the governance-adverse Republicans have found a way to strangle funding for a project that directly concerns national security. It looks as if they're having another one of their allergic, reflexive responses to a proposal by President Obama. That they would sacrifice national security to act out a grudge they hold against Obama speaks, perhaps, to their ideological purity. But in the end, it is both infantile and exceedingly weak. Rather funding $1 billion to try to resolve problems at their source that drive citizens to flee, thereby preventing them from appearing at our borders or Mexicos'. Penny wise and pound foolish, if you ask me. Well, OK, it's not as preposterous as Bill Clinton's Inquisition because of his BJ, but it goes in the same direction. Our country was built on the premise that governance would be based on the consent of the governed and be based upon logical, mature, rational debate. Denying funds to solve the immigrant crisis has none of those characteristics. How, then, are they upholding, protecting, and defending the US Constitution, as they have sworn to do?
1
From down here, the way north is still open. The allure of steady jobs, hamburgers that fill, and money to send home only grows stronger as the oppression of the poor never abates but only worsens year after year.
Sending money to somehow cure this dilemma is really a sad joke. Because money is at the root of the evil that ensnares the poor. 25 years ago Guatemala made well its own shoes and clothes. Now if you want to buy "new" things for a child only cheap shoddy goods from Taiwan or China are available. Shoes last only a few months. Everything one might want to buy that is made by man from drugs. to cheese, to yogurt, to milk, to auto parts, to hamburgers, to pizza. are all subject to reduced quality and adulteration. The consumer has absolutely NO protection whatsoever as the gov has sold out to the tricky Asian mkt.
All legal transactions are heavily taxed by the gov. All routine civil matters are hit with expensive "gates" where each pass costs bribes that are so built-in that there is no other way. Lawyers routinely with impunity bilk and steal from clients even taking lands and properties. The banks eagerly participate. Major companies hire at $6.25 a day workers who they abuse every which way.
Each successive administration finds a way to steal from the people. To think money from the US will somehow FIX this milieu is delusional.
TEN THOUSAND bilingual peace corps youth working with locals for transparency and civil rights MIGHT make a BIG Difference.
Sending money to somehow cure this dilemma is really a sad joke. Because money is at the root of the evil that ensnares the poor. 25 years ago Guatemala made well its own shoes and clothes. Now if you want to buy "new" things for a child only cheap shoddy goods from Taiwan or China are available. Shoes last only a few months. Everything one might want to buy that is made by man from drugs. to cheese, to yogurt, to milk, to auto parts, to hamburgers, to pizza. are all subject to reduced quality and adulteration. The consumer has absolutely NO protection whatsoever as the gov has sold out to the tricky Asian mkt.
All legal transactions are heavily taxed by the gov. All routine civil matters are hit with expensive "gates" where each pass costs bribes that are so built-in that there is no other way. Lawyers routinely with impunity bilk and steal from clients even taking lands and properties. The banks eagerly participate. Major companies hire at $6.25 a day workers who they abuse every which way.
Each successive administration finds a way to steal from the people. To think money from the US will somehow FIX this milieu is delusional.
TEN THOUSAND bilingual peace corps youth working with locals for transparency and civil rights MIGHT make a BIG Difference.
20
The root cause of the migration is simply more people than opportunity and the solution is for these countries to reduce their birth rate until their economies develop. The US should also do things to reduce the incentive to migrate like ending birth right citizenship which is a ridiculous policy and has been for a while given the ease of travel and knowledge of the large illegal immigrant population.
43
How about $0 in foreign aid and 100% refusal of entry? The problems of these countries are not problems we need to be managing. $300 million could do a lot domestically.
27
Images of unaccompanied children from Central America desperately crossing the Mexican border last summer captured the attention of mainstream media last summer--with little explanation of how such a disturbing phenomenon could take place at our doorsteps.
The U.S. has had an extraordinarily complicated relationship with Central America for decades, increasingly intersecting with and through Mexico. Until recently, the U.S. could reasonably deal with issues more or less independently-namely, migration, economic development, dictatorship, drug trafficking, gun trafficking, etc. However, many developments (some outside the purview of the U. S.) expose the lack of comprehensive U.S. polices regarding immigration, drug trafficking, trafficking of arms and political corruption. Indeed, regardless of one's political positions, we have to recognize that the weight of poorly developed policy falls disproportionately on the border states, and those communities affected by immigration and illegal drugs originating in Mexico, Central America and Columbia.
Sending soldiers to the border to shoot may appeal to those that want a quick-fix but will it will not "fix" anything!
The U.S. has had an extraordinarily complicated relationship with Central America for decades, increasingly intersecting with and through Mexico. Until recently, the U.S. could reasonably deal with issues more or less independently-namely, migration, economic development, dictatorship, drug trafficking, gun trafficking, etc. However, many developments (some outside the purview of the U. S.) expose the lack of comprehensive U.S. polices regarding immigration, drug trafficking, trafficking of arms and political corruption. Indeed, regardless of one's political positions, we have to recognize that the weight of poorly developed policy falls disproportionately on the border states, and those communities affected by immigration and illegal drugs originating in Mexico, Central America and Columbia.
Sending soldiers to the border to shoot may appeal to those that want a quick-fix but will it will not "fix" anything!
6
Why do editorials insist on clumping all of Central America together? Yes, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua have serious examples of violence and poverty, with thousands fleeing their borders. But the same is not true of Costa Rica and Panama. Yes, drug trafficking is on the rise all around thanks to Mexican and Colombian cartels while the insatiable appetite for drugs in the US never seems to cease. I say legalize drugs and the money wars will fade away from areas it was never invited to in the first place.
7
I would only add that as climate changes continues to disrupt the growing seasons here in Central America as is happening again this year the pressure to GET OUT increases considerably. With eroded land and extreme weather the delicate balance tips away from survival to famine. It's a hand to mouth existence here and without food the young man and women strikes out for the USA to feed the family and save the folks from starvation. Truly it is a noble quest strongly supported by everyone even the GOV.
ONLY active participation in the culture will prevent MASS migrations in the future. The "situation" only becomes more precarious every year.
If we think it will somehow go away, we are incredibly foolish. Thinking the Mexicans will stand in the gap is absurd. They will only CHARGE more $$ to let them through. Now the cost to coyotes is around $6,000. Adding on another $1,000 is not going to be a bar to getting through Mexico.
I don't believe these Mex figures; they have every reason to distort them. All indicators in the communities I am very familiar with is that the flow of illegal immigration continues as always. The ones who get through not required to report their success.
ONLY ACTIVE PARTICIPATION in the cultures will bring the change required to stabilize the region. SEND TEN THOUSAND bilingual caseworkers to assist the people in getting fair wages, effective law enforcement and honest judiciary to start. Support their civil rights from within or face the influx.
ONLY active participation in the culture will prevent MASS migrations in the future. The "situation" only becomes more precarious every year.
If we think it will somehow go away, we are incredibly foolish. Thinking the Mexicans will stand in the gap is absurd. They will only CHARGE more $$ to let them through. Now the cost to coyotes is around $6,000. Adding on another $1,000 is not going to be a bar to getting through Mexico.
I don't believe these Mex figures; they have every reason to distort them. All indicators in the communities I am very familiar with is that the flow of illegal immigration continues as always. The ones who get through not required to report their success.
ONLY ACTIVE PARTICIPATION in the cultures will bring the change required to stabilize the region. SEND TEN THOUSAND bilingual caseworkers to assist the people in getting fair wages, effective law enforcement and honest judiciary to start. Support their civil rights from within or face the influx.
8
You're correct. Americans have little idea how bad things really are in Central America or why. There is almost no existence more miserable or oppressed than that of a poor and poorly educated (the two invariably go together) Central American woman. No skills, no way to earn a living, no way to close the gap and get the skills that can help you earn a decent living, and importantly, no way to protect yourself or your kids gang violence or sexual violence. I'm convinced that by the standards currently being used in immigration courts, two thirds of Central American women would qualify for asylum. So instead of wasting money on these prisons/hotels for migrant families -- which stand to cost us half a billion dollars a year -- the US should expand USAID programs in Central America and try and fill the gap that these crooked, uncaring, self-serving governments have left. The US government and the private sector alike should bring all possible pressure to bear on them.
Grade school textbooks and birth control. No more cash.
2
It is not America's job to solve whatever migrant crisis is going on in Central America, and it is certainly not our responsibility to simply allow anyone that crosses the Mexico border and enters the United States illegally to stay here and receive taxpayer benefits, citizenship and the right to vote in US elections.
Yet that is what's going on.
What if the 90 million Americans abandoned by Obama who are out of the workforce and in poverty up and decided to show up in Mexico demanding govt benefits and citizenship in Mexico?
We know how that would turn out.
Why is Barack Obama allowing tens of millions of illegals to do to our country what none of us could ever do to theirs?
Because he's an incompetent, pro-Amnesty con artist.
Yet that is what's going on.
What if the 90 million Americans abandoned by Obama who are out of the workforce and in poverty up and decided to show up in Mexico demanding govt benefits and citizenship in Mexico?
We know how that would turn out.
Why is Barack Obama allowing tens of millions of illegals to do to our country what none of us could ever do to theirs?
Because he's an incompetent, pro-Amnesty con artist.
36
It always amazes me that poor people from Central America can make it to America to look for a better life, while the Americans who believe that America is a racist oligarchy are unable to even move to a better city within America. People in Appalachia are stuck in place. People in the inner city slums are stuck in place with gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions (hmm, the same problems that exist in Central America, the same reasons The Times cites for migration out of Central America). If America's inner cities are so bad, why haven't the residents of the inner cities taken the same action as Central Americans?
30
Think your argument all the way through. What's different? Poor people in other countries have no social safety net whatsoever. Even the trash gets heavily picked over. While here we have housing assistance, WIC, food stamps, Medicaid, Welfare and all of these programs keep a person rooted in place.
2
Assessing the level of violence and business infrastructure destruction in Central America by making a comparison to violence, gang activity, poor schools etc.in our inner city will nor in any way help you to envision the chaos and destruction the Central American folks are trying to escape. Compared to Honduras and El Salvador our worst inner cities are very safe with top notch educational opportunities for it's children.
overthetop,
If things are so lousy in Latino countries, then Latino leader need to be held accountable. Flooding our own inner cities with unskilled Latinos is hardly the solution to that problem.
If things are so lousy in Latino countries, then Latino leader need to be held accountable. Flooding our own inner cities with unskilled Latinos is hardly the solution to that problem.
6
Laudable sentiments, but I don't see how we can fix the problems with these countries, since they are essentially cultural. We can scarcely fix the problems with our own, including the effects of having so many unskilled illegal immigrants taxing our schools, services, and welfare state.
64
Not sure they are all "cultural." US corporations doing business in the region and paying $7 a day don't help. The US government supporting thieving goons like Juan Orlando Hernandez in Honduras is surely not helping. There are so many transparency issues in these countries that the US knows about but does nothing about. We just rewarded the government of El Salvador something like $300 million to develop its coastal tourism. Um, the homicide rate in El Salvador is now the highest in the world. I don't think there will be much tourism. The US embassy knows how corrupt the current government is. They could be calling people out left and right. But for some reason they don't. I have a feeling it has to do with our business interests in the region. You'd be surprised how many corporations do well and move loads of product in places like El Salvador and Honduras, despite violence, poverty, and misery all around.
1
The populations of Central American countries are not sustainable. Many are farmers. How can a farmer divide his land among ten children and their children's children? People migrate out of necessity - at first to the cities then later out of the country altogether. Affordable birth control is necessary, sooner than later.
42
It is heartening to see that the average nyt reader has more insight and understanding of the immigration problems facing the u.s. than the nyt does. While the nyt and most liberals continue to push for ever more immigrants to this country, the average American is coming to the realization that immigration policies that benefit immigrants, increasingly do not benefit the average citizen. As we continue to export decent American jobs overseas (where they magically turn into crappy jobs) and import wholesale: poor, uneducated, unskilled people with huge families, as though we have a shortage here, the average taxpayer realizes his lifestyle and family are taking the hit for these policies. A sane immigration policy would first and foremost be evaluated for what is best for this country and it's citizens. A sustainable population, one that lives with in its means, should be a national policy. The easiest way to achieve this is limiting immigration to the bare minimum that can be justified by the needs of this country not the immigrants. No problem we face as a nation and planet is improved or made more solvable by our exploding population. We should show the world the way forward to a sustainable future by limiting our population not by being the worlds dumping ground for its millions of extra people.
84
I read that wealthy Chinese are flying to LA to have their babies in posh Chinese birthing clinics, so the baby is entitled to US citizenship. As soon as the mother gets the US birth certificate, she flies back to China. The rules regarding US citizenship were established in a different age when American citizenship was not especially desired, the US did not have the social support system we have now, and difficulties in transportation made "drop babies" impossible.
5
Why must every solution be driven by lowering costs...why cant we just do the right thing...real connections with our fellow continental countries that fosters honest interactions in trade, humanitarian support, and wealth sharing
7
insist that we cut foreign countries checks that are liable to end up in the pockets of their leaders and complain when the Baltimore slums are not rectified. Choose one.
3
The United States cannot solve all of the problems of the world but can control immigration into the United States produced by those problems. Sensible immigration enforcement is not just at the borders but also within the country with programs such as E-Verify and the elimination of citizenship for persons born in the US whose parents were here illegally or on a visitor visa. The loss of jobs through disadvantageous trade agreements, unprotective visa rules, and illegal immigration are devastating the lives of many Americans, increasing income inequalities, and placing great burdens on American taxpayers. The concerns of the Democratic members of Congress about trade agreements and visa rules are reasonable. The lack of concern about prevention of illegal immigration and citizenship for persons born while their parents were in the US illegally is not. Just legalizing those who have immigrated illegally does not solve the fundamental problem.
88
Any continuing military or other government to government aid and assistance should be tied, legally by legislation or executive authority, to long term programs targeted to solve the immediate and underlying causes. The country-by-country programs could be written into local laws as well as treaties or other agreements between the US and those countries. Inspector generals would investigate and report on compliance.
12
There is one thing that would stop the devastation in Latin America. End our evil "war on drugs" and put the gangs and drug lords out of business.
We do not need to spend one billion dollars to determine this.
We do not need to spend one billion dollars to determine this.
26
"Yet American politicians have shown little interest in devoting resources to address the underlying reasons Central Americans continue to head north. They include gang violence, chronic poverty, high unemployment and weak government institutions."
Would there be gang violence, chronic poverty, and high unemployment if birth rates did not exceed the carrying capacity of the region? Many of the world's demographic problems are, at root, due to excessive population growth. People need to learn that it is wrong to have children without adequately preparing to nurture, educate, and provide decent prospects for them.
Europe and North America provide a cultural environment where, for the most part, children are nurtured and educated. China has its 'one child' policy. Central America governments must be convinced to make the necessary changes in attitude toward family planning.
Would there be gang violence, chronic poverty, and high unemployment if birth rates did not exceed the carrying capacity of the region? Many of the world's demographic problems are, at root, due to excessive population growth. People need to learn that it is wrong to have children without adequately preparing to nurture, educate, and provide decent prospects for them.
Europe and North America provide a cultural environment where, for the most part, children are nurtured and educated. China has its 'one child' policy. Central America governments must be convinced to make the necessary changes in attitude toward family planning.
46
Not going to happen, as long as Evangelical and Catholic churches have their way.
2
Central American governments are in lockstep with the Catholic Church on this particular issue. So, I would not sit around waiting for that to happen.
2
There’s a premise underlying the basic argument offered by this editorial that merits examination for validity. It’s that the U.S., indeed Mexico, has some pressing obligation to serve as the haven of last resort for uncontrolled numbers of innocents who are defrauded of workable lives, for any reason, by the failed states in which they were born and raised. I’d suggest that the premise is invalid.
And the premise expands to suggest that we have some obligation to concern ourselves intensely with the functionings of those failed states, with the implication that we should seek to change them fundamentally so that their failures are less impactful on their own people. Even more cause to question validity of the premise.
In a wealthy world with few other pressing priorities, we and Mexico might accept the burden of trying to equalize life-outcomes across frontiers so that less desperation is felt by those affected by UNequal life-outcomes and thereby reduce incentives to illegal “migration”. But we have MANY contending priorities and the notion that we even possess the resources to re-engineer nations, an extremely hubristic notion to begin with, is highly suspect.
Until failed states can re-engineer THEMSELVES, with the aid we can afford to give them, what remains is turning away at our borders those who seek to enter them illegally. That will have a human cost, but it’s not one that we have an obligation of absorbing to eliminate, or even one that we can absorb.
And the premise expands to suggest that we have some obligation to concern ourselves intensely with the functionings of those failed states, with the implication that we should seek to change them fundamentally so that their failures are less impactful on their own people. Even more cause to question validity of the premise.
In a wealthy world with few other pressing priorities, we and Mexico might accept the burden of trying to equalize life-outcomes across frontiers so that less desperation is felt by those affected by UNequal life-outcomes and thereby reduce incentives to illegal “migration”. But we have MANY contending priorities and the notion that we even possess the resources to re-engineer nations, an extremely hubristic notion to begin with, is highly suspect.
Until failed states can re-engineer THEMSELVES, with the aid we can afford to give them, what remains is turning away at our borders those who seek to enter them illegally. That will have a human cost, but it’s not one that we have an obligation of absorbing to eliminate, or even one that we can absorb.
44
This would be true if the US had never meddled with the internal workings of these specific countries.
We've meddled. Our drug laws make drug trafficking profitable. Our Cold War delusions were used to overthrow elected governments. We trained militaries that were internally used to put down civilians.
If we had never done these things, your argument would make sense.
We've meddled. Our drug laws make drug trafficking profitable. Our Cold War delusions were used to overthrow elected governments. We trained militaries that were internally used to put down civilians.
If we had never done these things, your argument would make sense.
I know that it would not be popular but, the U.S. should just take over and colonize these countries. This would stop the problem and give these poor people a future. You can not give their governments money as they can never be trusted.
9
We tried that in Iraq. It doesn't work.
3
That demonstrates a powerful ignorance of the history of Central American politics. In many cases, these governments have historically been unstable because of U.S. intervention. After the Spanish American War in 1898, U.S. invaded--with the use of the Marine Corps--Panama, Honduras, and Mexico, among others. There were so many of these micro-wars that historians use the broad term "the Banana wars" to describe them. U.S. invasions and occupations have fueled instability for decades. For example, the U.S. occupied Nicaragua almost constantly from 1912 to 1933, effectively liberalizing trade over goods such as bananas and sugar cane. When the U.S. wanted to build the Panama Canal, Panama was a part of Colombia. So what did we do? We backed the succession of Panama from the Republic of Colombia--and the Panama Canal was built under U.S. sovereignty!
I encourage you to look up the history of U.S. insertion of troops in Latin American countries, and our tendencies to prop up dictatorship governments which, surprise!, resulted in long-term institutional instability.
I encourage you to look up the history of U.S. insertion of troops in Latin American countries, and our tendencies to prop up dictatorship governments which, surprise!, resulted in long-term institutional instability.
6
I guess you mean our government can be trusted?
2
The center of this tragedy is drug trafficking. The flow of cocaine through Central America and Mexico has resulted in gangs effectively taking control of large swathes of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. The deportation of thousands of gang members from the U.S. back to their homelands over the last twenty-five years entrenched in these countries the gang members, their organizations and businesses. Besides drug smuggling through Central America and Mexico, the gangs have a number of other lucrative businesses, notably extortion and human trafficking. Organized extortion exists at all levels in the three Central American countries, penetrating communities in remote villages as well as the capital cities. Violence and its threat are the essential ingredients of extortion. Many mothers and youth see no escape from the vicious daily cycle of violence and extortion, except to get their kids out, and hopefully to the U.S. And the same organized gangs have a service for the right fee for that – human trafficking! The same logistical routes, consolidated via corruption, infrastructure and employees that were set up to smuggle drugs are used to smuggle persons – especially youth – to escape the violence that the same gangs create back home. The only way out of this crisis is for the U.S. to follow Portugal’s example and de-criminalize drug use. The wars on drugs are making some incredibly wealthy and powerful, but destroying lives, families, communities and countries.
28
The center of the tragedy is not drug trafficking. Fantasies that legalization of hard drugs would solve Central America's problems are completely naive. Drugs are barely even a factor in El Salvador, the most violent of all the countries. Do you honestly think legalization of drugs in the United States would cause things to just click into place in Central America?
2
The editorial board complains that Mexico's increased border security means that fewer Central American asylum-seekers are getting a chance to "make their case" after illegally entering the United States, but Central American asylum-seekers know that they are supposed to present their case for asylum at U.S. embassies in their home countries or at legal ports of entery. They also know Mexico has asylum laws similar to U.S. asylum laws. They trek a thousand miles across Mexico to game the system by wading the Rio Grande because they know loopholes in U.S. immigration laws and open border advocates make deportation difficult. We should change U.S. asylum policy to automatically deny asylum to anyone who enters the country illegally.
115
This is an Americas problem. Central American countries like El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala have suffered from corrupt right wing military dictatorships, narcotics trafficking and gun running as a result of malicious inhumane socioeconomic political American choices.
Nations like El Salvador -6.2 million people, Honduras- 8.2 million people and Guatemala -15.8 million people do not have a powerful focused domestic American socioeconomic political educational media ethnic sectarian supremacist lobby. Unlike Israel- 8.2 M, Cuba-11.2 M and Taiwan-23.4 M to push for more American aid. Nor do these nations have any fossil fuel resources nor are they facing a ethnic sectarian terrorist insurgency.
But they are much closer geographically and along ethnic sectarian demographic lines to America than any of those nations. America wastes billions in arms aid every year on the likes of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Afghanistan on foreign ethnic sectarian civil wars. Some of that money needs to be spent closer to home in accord with American interests and values. Since 1985 Israel has got $ 3 B a year. Humanitarian aid including food, water, shelter, education and medical health care along with diplomacy is likely to be more effective and less costly than war.
America is 13% Hispanic and about 2/3rds of the Hispanic immigrants come from Mexico which has fossil fuel resources and 122 million people. And most of them are not European whites.
Nations like El Salvador -6.2 million people, Honduras- 8.2 million people and Guatemala -15.8 million people do not have a powerful focused domestic American socioeconomic political educational media ethnic sectarian supremacist lobby. Unlike Israel- 8.2 M, Cuba-11.2 M and Taiwan-23.4 M to push for more American aid. Nor do these nations have any fossil fuel resources nor are they facing a ethnic sectarian terrorist insurgency.
But they are much closer geographically and along ethnic sectarian demographic lines to America than any of those nations. America wastes billions in arms aid every year on the likes of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Afghanistan on foreign ethnic sectarian civil wars. Some of that money needs to be spent closer to home in accord with American interests and values. Since 1985 Israel has got $ 3 B a year. Humanitarian aid including food, water, shelter, education and medical health care along with diplomacy is likely to be more effective and less costly than war.
America is 13% Hispanic and about 2/3rds of the Hispanic immigrants come from Mexico which has fossil fuel resources and 122 million people. And most of them are not European whites.
11
Corruption does not know a 'wing' in these countries. El Salvador has been governed by FMNL since 2009. Left wing party, former guerrillas during the civil war. Guatemala elected nationalists in 2011 but were governed by socialists before that. Honduras elected nationalists as well after a Chavez allied liberals lost.
Changes nothing. Oligarchy is oligarchy. Its elites fighting with each other supported and underwritten by the $billions sent from illegal immigrants in the U.S. The least we could do is tax those transfers to recoup social spending.
Changes nothing. Oligarchy is oligarchy. Its elites fighting with each other supported and underwritten by the $billions sent from illegal immigrants in the U.S. The least we could do is tax those transfers to recoup social spending.
10
So now the U.S. is responsible for Central American problems too? I think asylum cases should be viewed on a case-by-case basis, but stop trying to put every problem in the world at the feet of the United States. In any case, part of being a sovereign nation means losing the right to try to externalize every problem you have to someone else. Countries (and people) taking the position that the U.S. has universal responsibility for every problem would probably simultaneously deny that the U.S. has a corresponding right to insert itself into the affairs of other nations. If we are to be held responsible for the well-being of everyone on the planet, then we would have every right to interfere with other governments' decisions about leadership and policy. Since I do NOT believe we have that right or power, I would also reject the notion that we have responsibilities that are so far-reaching as to make us responsible for every humanitarian crisis. Central America has many neighbors that by their very proximity should be the first candidates for immigration/asylum. If South America and Mexico have wiped their hands of their own neighbors, why must we fill the void?
2
This is a powerful and cogent argument. Why wouldn't the US spend money on this as they do on Israel's security especially when our government has codified the Mexican/US border issue as a security issue? The border is militarized. BP agents are armed to the teeth. The answer in my mind is our country's history of racism toward brown, indigenous, marginalized, and poor people.
1
to read NYT stories and comment boards one would believe that because of unaddressed domestic concerns we do not have the money for the Department of Defense or wars abroad. Yet reliably I read on these pages once a month that we have plenty of cash to throw at third world countries to supposedly fix their internal problems but in actuality will simply line the pockets of their dictators. We do not have the money to solve the world's problems and we don't have the money to keep taking in immigrants from Mexico. Liberals will tell you that "we can't send them all back", I say that is precisely what we can and must do, it is the only way to make the tsunami stop.
66
Precisely. And that's what Italy and Greece and Calais need to do, as well. Before civil war breaks out.
8
But to equate what we spend on the military, which is all a total loss, and what we could spend on making lives better for thousands of immigrants--it's utter nonsense.
1
What about what we could spend on making the lives of thousands of native born, disenfranchised citizens better??
1
The border and immigration problem could be solved very simply.
1) Deploy National Guard units on the southern border with orders to shoot anyone crossing illegally.
2) Minimum three year prison term for any employer who knowingly hires illegals.
The fact that the solution to the problem is so simple tells you that the problem only exists because those in power aren't actually interested in solving it. They don't want to fix immigration. They don't want to reduce the flow of immigrants whatsoever. The Democrats want more Hispanics for election purposes, and the Republicans are beholden to their corporate base that wants more low-cost illegal labor. The entire political spectacle about immigration is, like so much else in Washington, just theatre. It's a tough pill to swallow that those in power are not simply incompetent, but actively and intentionally working to destroy the country. But it is what it is.
1) Deploy National Guard units on the southern border with orders to shoot anyone crossing illegally.
2) Minimum three year prison term for any employer who knowingly hires illegals.
The fact that the solution to the problem is so simple tells you that the problem only exists because those in power aren't actually interested in solving it. They don't want to fix immigration. They don't want to reduce the flow of immigrants whatsoever. The Democrats want more Hispanics for election purposes, and the Republicans are beholden to their corporate base that wants more low-cost illegal labor. The entire political spectacle about immigration is, like so much else in Washington, just theatre. It's a tough pill to swallow that those in power are not simply incompetent, but actively and intentionally working to destroy the country. But it is what it is.
70
Why in the world should we depend on corrupt, undemocratic nations to our south, to resolve our illegal immigration crisis? Having been born and raised in Latin America myself, I know US aid always quickly disappears in the pockets of politicians there. I have come to believe that neither Republicans or Democrats want to fully secure our southern border, the first because it wants cheap labor for businesses and the latter because it is counting on the Latino vote to win presidential elections. So we, Americans, have been virtually abandoned by our leaders, and although I do not approve of many policies being created in Arizona and Texas to try to counter the illegal immigration flood, I must say that I sympathize with the sheer desperation and deep frustration that is felt in our border states.
140
Thanks for seeing it for what it is.
2
And things WILL NOT get better as long as you have a US President giving amnesty to millions and a US Congress doing nothing to stop Birth Right Citizenship and The DOJ unwilling to enforce the LAWS..... YES nothing is going to change EXCEPT the demographics of American....and NOT FOR THE GOOD !!!!
64
THe 3 Central American countries mentioned as the culprits of illegal migration are not the best candidates to receive aid from us that would effectively used without being squandered by these corrupt former socialist and neo-communist governments. What we could do is partner with them certain programs on border security and provide social aid through funding American non-profits organizations to work alongside the people to provide education and entrepreneurial training to identify self-starting opportunities to keep migrants at home. If Mexico requires aid to strengthen it's southern borders then some of the existing border $$ be dispersed for that purpose only if results can be clearly demonstrated. Programs that encourage creating assembly jobs in these countries that can be exported to the US at reduced tariffs could be considered. It's obvious that Central America is well positioned in terms of labor and location that could conceivably compete with Asia exports. Otherwise use technology - sensors, drones, war zone fencing, even explosives that are set off in the distance to ward off illegals on our borders. With a budget of 10-12 billion surely 5 billion is wasted on bureaucracy. Hire large contractors such as Honeywell, Raytheon etc - high tech industries from the military to provide solutions that are effective on our borders - don't leave it to border patrols sitting in Chevys near the border waiting for folks crossing the desert - time to deploy an offense plan.
22
Why now after over 200 years does the US feel that it must fortify its border? My concern is that fortified borders work BOTH ways. As it is now, try and leave the US without showing your papers and receiving the approval of some government official.
2
Obviously NNY knows nothing about the current situations in Guatemala and Honduras, or their recent history. Both have long histories of rightist-dictatorships, have fragile democracies which fear military coups and return to dictatorial rule.
read
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42580.pdf
about Guatemala
read
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42580.pdf
about Guatemala
1
LH - I know all about Sandinista Ortega and his murderous group, Guatemala tattoo gangs that are devastating Southern California and elsewhere in the southwest etc. They are essentially fake democracies, that what you don't realize. That's why we can't give aid to countries directly to Communists and gangs - we must employ American nonprofits already there doing good works to help the innocent citizens there.
One single action would stop nearly all illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America, end your farm subsidies so Mexican agriculture, more specifically, Mexican corn can compete.
79
The United States/Mexico 2014 trade imbalance was $53.8-billion in Mexico's favor. We export far more jobs to Mexico than we import. This is why Mexico has a lower unemployment rate than the United States. As part of the NAFTA agreement, Mexico set up subsidies for Mexican farmers to offset subsides that the United States pays American farmers, but according to the Los Angeles Times, the Mexican farm subsidies are "providing large financial subsidies to the families of notorious drug traffickers and several senior government officials, including the agriculture minister."
6
Illegal immigrants from Central America send back many more $billions every year than the U.S would provide in aid.
These government's have a vested financial interest in sending as many people as possible to the United States. They get free healthcare and education and send back money. There is no incentive for them to improve their economies or give up their corrupt oligarchies so long as the U.S allows millions to stay.
The droves will keep coming until we stop them. The question is not whether Congress will help these governments. It's whether they will stand up for taxpayers, American workers and the law.
These government's have a vested financial interest in sending as many people as possible to the United States. They get free healthcare and education and send back money. There is no incentive for them to improve their economies or give up their corrupt oligarchies so long as the U.S allows millions to stay.
The droves will keep coming until we stop them. The question is not whether Congress will help these governments. It's whether they will stand up for taxpayers, American workers and the law.
121
Precisely the same situation in the EU: Poland for example sends its excess unemployed to the UK, where the absurd benefits system allows them to send billions back to Poland, while exerting huge pressures on services in the UK. The host population of the UK looks on helplessly, while its Prime Minister is busy trying to persuade them what a great and wonderful thing the EU is, and trying to find ways to rig the upcoming referendum on EU membership so the vote goes the way Poland and European corporations would like.
6
Do I understand that you are claiming that remittances are the same thing as foreign aid? By definition, that makes no sense at all.
If the U.S. allowed entire families to migrate, remittances would not be such an issue. You don't have to send money back to your family in Guatemala when your family is with you in the U.S., paying taxes and contributing to the local economy. I encourage you to take a look at the waiting time for family-sponsored immigration from Central American countries.
And again, international law requires that asylum-seekers be taken in. So fi law-makers stood up for the law, as you say, they would recognize this refugee crisis as what it is.
If the U.S. allowed entire families to migrate, remittances would not be such an issue. You don't have to send money back to your family in Guatemala when your family is with you in the U.S., paying taxes and contributing to the local economy. I encourage you to take a look at the waiting time for family-sponsored immigration from Central American countries.
And again, international law requires that asylum-seekers be taken in. So fi law-makers stood up for the law, as you say, they would recognize this refugee crisis as what it is.
We do not have enough water, jobs, housing or spots in school. Even the present number of entries is too high.
103
Last year, Fairfax County Public Schools took in over 1,000 unaccompanied minors into a school system that already has an $8 Million shortfall. We must do something to help these countries take care of their own...we cannot absorb millions of Central Americans into the US when we can't even take care of OUR own.
46
Virginia took 1000 kids? Obama shipped 1000 illegal immigrants from Texas per day to California, on top of our already high daily rate of illegal immigration across the San Diego border. He did this because pro-amnesty enclaves such as Chicago and Baltimore hypocritically refused to take any. We're out of water here in California. This is not the place to house, feed, clothe, medicate and educate thousands of illegal immigrants, of which we have done the lion's share over the decades.
44
I don't know if you've been paying attention to the oncoming Baby Boomer Retirement Crisis, but expanding population means an expanding tax base. The more people there are in the consumer economy, the more the consumer economy grows. Populations are self-sustaining. When I population's consumption grows, so too does its output. Supply and demand, eh?
If the U.S., arguably the richest country in the world--not to mention one of the largest countries geographically--cannot absorb migrants, who can? And "No one; refugees should just stay put" is not a valid answer. It's laughable to think that the lack of somewhere to go will mean that migrants won't leave.
If the U.S., arguably the richest country in the world--not to mention one of the largest countries geographically--cannot absorb migrants, who can? And "No one; refugees should just stay put" is not a valid answer. It's laughable to think that the lack of somewhere to go will mean that migrants won't leave.
Exploding populations and degraded resources are driving this bus.
Until population growth is brought under control I see no end in sight.
It is less expensive to have Mexico stop them and we should continue to support their efforts with more than words.
Until population growth is brought under control I see no end in sight.
It is less expensive to have Mexico stop them and we should continue to support their efforts with more than words.
96
Instead of the United States borrowing money from China and then handing it over to corrupt nations in Central America, why not use it to build homes for homeless Americans?
Instead of abandoning their homelands, why don't Central Americans try to emulate the United States? They could start by replacing their constitutions with something that resembles the Constitution of the United States. Next, they could pass laws similar to the laws in the U.S. This way, they would be able to stay in their homelands and not have to risk their lives trying to get into the U.S. They should also try using birth control.
Instead of abandoning their homelands, why don't Central Americans try to emulate the United States? They could start by replacing their constitutions with something that resembles the Constitution of the United States. Next, they could pass laws similar to the laws in the U.S. This way, they would be able to stay in their homelands and not have to risk their lives trying to get into the U.S. They should also try using birth control.
74
What Central America would seem to need is what Singapore has found, in terms of firm, no-nonsense government.
28
america should aid education health care and development and you can see democracy returning to central america
1
We are not doing a very good job of taking care of feeding, housing, and educating our legal American citizens. Why would we want to spend our limited resources helping people who are lawbreakers just by the very fact that they are here? We have to stop the influx of poor, uneducated, unskilled people who will provide nothing to our country except more mouths to feed.
I was sitting in a restaurant in Alabama over the weekend and I had to suffer through a table of loud Mexicans speaking Spanish in loud voices. My friends whose grandparents migrated from Italy say that English was learned quickly and always spoken in the home because they valued the help this would provide their children. I guess times have changed.
I was sitting in a restaurant in Alabama over the weekend and I had to suffer through a table of loud Mexicans speaking Spanish in loud voices. My friends whose grandparents migrated from Italy say that English was learned quickly and always spoken in the home because they valued the help this would provide their children. I guess times have changed.
36
The reasons Congress has so little interest in reducing pressures to flee from Central America are captured in your editorial. Doubling the budget of Customs and Border Protection over the past decade means thousands of jobs in the Southwest, essentially middle class jobs in a poor region. Plus a growing share goes to all kinds of surveillance technology and vendors of such technology are only to happy to peddle their wares. How much do manufacturers plus managers of private immigration prisons donate in campaign contributions? Spending a billion dollars on development assistance in Central America would likely reduce the rationale for spending so much on agents, technology, and prisons.
Besides, we need a sustained flow of aspiring immigrants to assure we focus on catching border-crossers rather than efforts to interdict narcotics. Hysteria over Central American migrants is a calculated distraction from the drug trade. Furthermore El Salvador and Guatemala have been made safe thanks to aggressive US intervention against leftist insurgencies. Remember our impressive successes?
Besides, we need a sustained flow of aspiring immigrants to assure we focus on catching border-crossers rather than efforts to interdict narcotics. Hysteria over Central American migrants is a calculated distraction from the drug trade. Furthermore El Salvador and Guatemala have been made safe thanks to aggressive US intervention against leftist insurgencies. Remember our impressive successes?
6
I don't understand why migrants being rightly deterred in Mexico is a problem for us.
129
Because, each detained illegal is a potential fraudulent Democratic vote. Or the producer of an anchor baby.
4
Article 14(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." Mexico, a country of widespread corruption and prolonged police and cartel violence, can hardly be faulted for its inability to absorb these migrants. Does that exempt the U.S. from its obligations, under international law?
1
Exactly right.
2
Violence, poverty, bad government - that defines much of the third world's population; are we ready to let a billion migrants into the US? Ten million a year? What is the limit? And where is the concern for our own citizens, all too many living in violent, poverty ridden inner cities, or stuck in other hell holes.
140
Where will our armed forces get volunteer recruits if we improve education, increase employment opportunities and eliminate poverty in our cities? The status quo provides cannon fodder for our foreign military follies.
Conflating the well-being of transnational migrants with the well-being of natural-born citizens is disingenuous.
The government and nonprofit entities working on these social issues are completely distinct, and the problems facing each demographic could not be more distinct. The U.S. should not offer asylum to migrants because we fail to offer adequate social safety net programs in our own "poverty ridden inner cities"? It's not that the U.S. does not possess the resources needed to address both of those issues: it's that we choose not to.
The government and nonprofit entities working on these social issues are completely distinct, and the problems facing each demographic could not be more distinct. The U.S. should not offer asylum to migrants because we fail to offer adequate social safety net programs in our own "poverty ridden inner cities"? It's not that the U.S. does not possess the resources needed to address both of those issues: it's that we choose not to.
Jen,
Many municipalities have been literally flooded with unskilled Latinos who do not speeak English, have lots of kids and no real job skills. The US should not offer amnesty to such law breakers because we will only get more of them. The US not responsible for solving the problems of Latin America.
Many municipalities have been literally flooded with unskilled Latinos who do not speeak English, have lots of kids and no real job skills. The US should not offer amnesty to such law breakers because we will only get more of them. The US not responsible for solving the problems of Latin America.
2
Exactly like US intervention radicalized Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq, Reagan's funding of slaughter and backing brutal dictators across Central America has done the very same thing.
Instead of supporting the evolution of social democracy, more just societies, Reagan backed the avaricious ruling classes, the usual stooges for exploitation by the United Fruit's of the world.
Not surprisingly, the only country in Central America where Reagan failed to stop a social revolution, Nicaragua, is the only one whose citizens are not fleeing to the US in the tens of thousands.
Instead of supporting the evolution of social democracy, more just societies, Reagan backed the avaricious ruling classes, the usual stooges for exploitation by the United Fruit's of the world.
Not surprisingly, the only country in Central America where Reagan failed to stop a social revolution, Nicaragua, is the only one whose citizens are not fleeing to the US in the tens of thousands.
34
Always blame it on someone who's long dead and longer out of office...rather than the jerk in charge now, who's specific policies have allowed this mad rush of illegal aliens into America. It's the Democratic way.
22
Not true, craig geary, you forgot Costa Rica, a stable democracy with education and health care for its people. Of course "Ticos" have an incredibly hard time getting visas to even visit the US. What would we do with educated migrants who've learned English in school?
2
What about Costa Rica? No revolution there.
2
“The root causes of migration haven’t gone away . . .Things are certainly not getting any better.”
That is the trade agreement. That proves again the Democrats were right to stop the latest one.
That is the trade agreement. That proves again the Democrats were right to stop the latest one.
28
Dear Mr. Thomason,
I know very little about Central America and find your argument that the latest influx of migration from those countries to the United States is the result of a trade agreement (I suppose you are referring to NAFTA) is intriguing. Would you care to expatiate upon your theory.
I know very little about Central America and find your argument that the latest influx of migration from those countries to the United States is the result of a trade agreement (I suppose you are referring to NAFTA) is intriguing. Would you care to expatiate upon your theory.
1
Traditional occupations collapsed all across the region under the impact of trade agreements. The largest part of that was subsistence farming.
That was a poor life, but it was a life. Those people were displaced, moved to cities and found no jobs. They've become migrant, or migrant pressure on the population total.
The idea of the trade agreements was that those people would move to more productive occupations. That didn't happen. They moved from poor occupations to no occupation. No provision was made for them. They were excess to requirements in the re-made economies.
Certainly leaving them in subsistence agriculture or equivalent was not a good long term way to govern their nation. However, what was done with the trade agreements managed to be even worse for everyone except a few wealthy interests (largely controlling their local governments) that profited immensely.
That was a poor life, but it was a life. Those people were displaced, moved to cities and found no jobs. They've become migrant, or migrant pressure on the population total.
The idea of the trade agreements was that those people would move to more productive occupations. That didn't happen. They moved from poor occupations to no occupation. No provision was made for them. They were excess to requirements in the re-made economies.
Certainly leaving them in subsistence agriculture or equivalent was not a good long term way to govern their nation. However, what was done with the trade agreements managed to be even worse for everyone except a few wealthy interests (largely controlling their local governments) that profited immensely.
6
He can't. He's just spewing more talking points on topics he is ignorant of. I propose that Clawson, MI be on of the destination hubs that illegals are resettled. In fact I'm positive that Mark would be a fine sponsor to house and help all those poor Central Americans.
4
Yet we are supposed to solve the crisis of corrupt and delinquent governments in Central America. It's not just US drug use that lies at the heart of these nation's problems. It's the design of their societies, the huge gap between the impoverished and wealthy, and a longstanding culture of corrupt police and government officials from the local to national.
American aid alone will never be sufficient to solve these problems.