Subtopia has an article on inflatable prisons which I am directed to by BLDGBLOG. It makes for pretty grim reading. I knew migration was a problem, but as a solution, these seem pretty inhumane: '“the tents are windowless and the walls are blank, and no partitions ordoors separate the five toilets, five sinks, five shower heads and
eating areas. [..] Lacking utensils on some days, detainees eat with
their hands.”'
Thee's something seriously creepy about these disposable Guantanamos, housing a burgeoning demographic group. Who knows, maybe the next great novel of the twenty-first century will be written about those who live in these growing populations - about their births, their deaths, their lives and loves, entire dynasties incarcerated by a state which provides everything but freedom and privacy...
59 comments:
I remember reading a short story at school that told of an all female prison. The conditions were appalling: the inmates were kept in cells that were akin to cages, barely big enough for their bodies; there were no seperate washrooms, the inmates had to do it in a trough... etc.
It was very skillfully written and evoked outrage in the reader. However, the twist in the tale was that the story was talking about battery hens - not humans. This practise has declined - I don't know, it might even be illegal nowadays. It seems insidiously ironic to me that we treat animals better than many of these prisoners*.
*Although another, seperate debate exists that criminals in the UK get treated too well.
people inside the US are screaming to get illegal immigration under control. Vast amounts of our tax dollars go to feeding educating and housing these people. And then jailing or exporting them. not to mention diseases they bring. The 'good" they do, simply takes jobs out of the possible range for uneducated unskilled Americans. Land of the free, offers so much to these people, they are willing to starve, be imprisoned, freeze, drown, however to get here. Let's not be too hasty to judge the conditions of these tents.
Nothing we couldn't catch for ourselves, I'm sure.
I did try and keep my comments deliberately mild - there's very little doubt in my mind that conditions in those tents are evil and degrading, but I recognize that they're a desperate response to a desperate problem so I tried to tone my disapproval down to a minimum.
I guess a discussion of immigration generally is inevitable (sigh).
Ooh, those illegal immigrants, sneaking into the country just so they can wash our cars and mow our lawns. C'mon, get real. Every study of illegal immigration shows that they boost the local economy, providing more jobs for all.
if there are any "uneducated unskilled Americans" out there, I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for them. This is the land of opportunity, for reral, and if they are too lazy to take advantage of it, they deserve to have their low paid jobs taken away by harder working immigrants. (And I work in an indutsry where our jobs are being taken away by low paid non-immigrants, so don't think I don't know what that's like.)
I find it particularly ironic, maddening, depressing that some of the most abhorent racist nonsense about the perceived perils of immigration come from nations born of immigration, such as the US , UK and Australia.
Where would each of these nations be without immigration? The US has 500 years of immigration history - I strongly suspect that every American reading this text now is actually an immigrant and most are incredibly proud of their heritage. Same too for Australia - 200+ years of immigration, culminating in pointless expressions of violence such as the Cronulla riots.
"Come to Cronulla this weekend to take revenge. This Sunday every Aussie in the Shire get down to North Cronulla to support Leb and wog bashing day", said the SMS used to drive support. What is an "Aussie" anyway? Save for those descended from Aborigines, every Australian is an immigrant.
And finally to the UK. Who is truely British, or English in this country? Almost no-one, I suspect. This country has 2000+ years of immigration history from the Romans to the Polish. Each one of us is an immigrant.
So what is this anti-immigrant sentiment that is prevalent in each country and, very sadly, on this thread? It's a sorry, pointless, spat between new and old immigrants with the old not wishing to share their new country with the new set.
Why don't these people want to share their country with the new in take? Why don't they want others to share in the great and good of their new nation? I fear for the answer.
[Sorry to have gone off topic, but this 'immigration is bad' claptrap makes my blood boil]
I'm not anti- immigant, I am anti, illegal, crime committing immigrant. Actually I am taking a defensive posture simply because no one else on this "thread" will ever do so. devils' advocate.
I'm anti-illegal, crime-committing residents. Stiring up trouble on the base of someone's religion or race is illegal in this country.
hyuk
jon, it has an effect on local commerce and health systems. It is a real problem and a real blessing. Don't everybody get high and mighty. Immigrants from you-name-it country have immense worth because they are human, but if they disrespect the laws of the country they are trying to immigrate to, then perhaps there needs to be some form of control. I think it is appropriate to discourage border runs. You try running a country where there is absolutely no border control "because we're all immigrants anyways" and see how you like it.
All of my ancestors are either native or immigrated legally (ie, went through law-abiding channels). I wouldn't be ashamed of them if they hadn't, but I still don't condone border running. Let every Mexican who can and will enter legally and work hard do so. And let every American citizen admire their new fellow-countrymen and respect their right to work and earn and live.
Amen sister.
Not all unregistered immigrant are thieves and criminals - but if they've entered the country illegally then, for whatever reason, whether they could make a positive contribution or not, the country/society in question surely has the right to react.
I'm afraid I am ignorant and somewhat naive on the subject, but the first question that springs to my mind is the right of a country to detain a person that has entered the country illegally. Who polices the rights of international immigrants? I mean if you imprison them, what rights do they have? If you deport the person, what's to stop them returning? It must be a massive undertaking. The article you link to, Matt, does focus on the 'Guantanamo-esque' nature of the prisons. I don't deny that this is a horrible picture. It also notes some pretty massive figures of immigrants though. While highlighting that so many are being subjected to these conditions, it also says that so many are illegally trying to enter another country.
In the USA/Mexico example, it is a safe assumption the the traffic is one-way and the bill is going to be the responsibility of the US. How is the Mexican government involved in this process? I can't imagine that it is running a bus service for all the immigrants to take them into Mexico city... (would there be any room for them !?). Do they pay anything to the US for (ahem) looking after their citizens?
[aside] Battery hens - not illegal; extremely common, in fact. If the packaging for your eggs doesn't say 'free range' or 'barn', they're from battery hens (and you should be ashamed). Bizarrely, that regulation exists because non-battery eggs were deemed to be a hazard to health, and needed a warning. [/aside]
That's what we have right here in the UK and the rest of Europe. Everyone with a European passport has the right to live and work anywhere in Europe. There is no border control but that has nothing to do with "we're all immigrants anyways".
Why can't immigrants come to the US (insert your country name as appropriate) to work and live, regardless of their method of entry? (Note : I said 'work' as in pay taxes)
a bit of beaurocracy. One need citizenship to get a social security number. One needs a Social Security number to pay taxes,or be eligible for a refund, to prove citizenship, to be eligible for low income housing, etc.
ok, I can see that the rules in the US rather proclude this, but scrape away that particular law : Why shouldn't an immigrant come to the US to work and live, or alternatively, what's wrong with the idea of an immigrant coming to the US to work and live?
Welcome mat is out darling, you're welcome anytime with the proper papers in hand. Bring your wife and your mother and her mother if you like.
proper papers... again, that's just the law of the land. The US is one of the last places on Earth I'd choose to live, but then, the US probably feels I'm the last kind of citizen it wants, so that's all fair.
What's wrong with an immigrant coming to work and live in the US? Ignore the requirement for papers, which I suspect is code for 'as long as they're legal'. If an immigrant pays taxes fairly and squarely through doing a job of work, why can't they live there?
I think you're quite wrong there. Factory farms are more or less the standard right now, and you're listing just a few of the terrible things that happen there.
You are conveniently ignoring yourself talk, jon. You've gotten emotional and stepped over the obvious disconnect in your argument. I said, "absolutely no border control" and you responded with, "we have that... everyone with a European passport." I hate to break it to you, but a passport is a very controled form of border control. They are not equal equations.
I've known people waiting years for their "papers", that have come over leagally on work visas and wish to stay permanently. I can't imagine when these visas expire and citizenship is still in the hands of the Department of Slow and Redundant Paperwork, packing up, selling your house, saying goodbye to your friends, family, and job, and going "home".
Almost all of our problem is the number of people we let in legally. If there wasn't a limit, nobody would face razor wire, dogs, guns, desert, and, um, tents to come here.
The funny thing is that I've seen these temporary structures before. They have them is a very expensive resort in Idaho, and are using them as the resort until construction is complete elsewhere on site. They're kind of nice - double layered and well insulated, with a packaged air conditioning unit.
Okay peeps. My ignorance of immigrants is joined by an ignorance in poultry farming (and all other farming, including livestock and agriculture). I didn't think hen batteries were quite so prevalent. I don't know why I said that - possibly because I frequently buy my eggs from a farm shop.
I didn't intend to list the woes of battery hen conditions. I was only recalling a short story I read some 14 years ago.
All right people, now I happen to be in a position where I actually deal with work visas and greencards, for a living, so I am (slightly) qualified to speak on the matter. The only countries facing retrogression for immigrant visa numbers are China and India. (We can't help that we're popular with them. We are.) China and India have MASSIVE amounts of people, I think you will agree. This means that our hotly-contested "quotas" are maxed out and I know off-hand about 60 people who are in the middle of a two year wait. But - and this is important - they have the ability to remain in the country on an extension of their previously limited visa until that comes through. No, they are not citizens, no they are not receiving the same rights and benefits that citizens do, but that's true in countries straight across the board.
I also happen to be in a position to be aware of a couple who are trying to get their work visas for the UK (they happen to be my parents). Because they are not lucky enough to be EU, they cannot enter on passports and work in the UK. Is this unfair? Is this discrimination? Of course it's discrimination. Do you hear me squaking? No. Why? Because the UK has it's reasons. As does the US. As does Albania and Latvia and Niger.
.. .which you do not have to show. I suspect Mexicans crossing the US border have passports?
Mostly its charities, like Amnesty, I think.
However, if you are (a) in Europe and (b) a human, you are covered by the European Convention on Human Rights irrespective of how you got there. To that end, you should be able to rely on the judicial system of your new host nation to look after you. The caveat is that the ECHR is really a list of things that require to be balances against the real world and the real world can often outweigh.
I'm honestly curious about this and all I know comes from friends that were in the system but may not have understood it well, media sources (ha!), and vague rumor. Is there really no wait list from Mexico - you just apply for citizenship and they shake your hand and open the door? There are no hurdles in someone's way short of criminality that would make them cross illegally? Do we have a minimum-ammount-in-your-bank-account limit?
Yeah, the article said they were used by troops in the Gulf for 'recreational purposes'. Leaving aside the 'no internal compartments' pointed out in the article (which I'm sure isn't the case in Idaho), and the no windows thing, they're still creepy. Who knows, they might be nicer than any other building these people have ever lived in, but still... creepy.
The passport thing is a bit of a red herring. If you're within a country that is a signatory to the Schengen Agreement, then you don't have to show your passport. The UK is not a signatory because we hate Johnny Foreigner his strange attitudes towards womwn, war and cuisine.
As recognized by most economists and, yes, even the Republican Party leadership, illegal immigration has been an essential part of the powerhouse driving the American economy for the last fifty years. If we did manage to completely eradicate illegal immigration, we'd be some crumby economic backwater like, say, France, inside ten or twenty years.
Also, the fact that it is so easy for immigrants of all stripes to get jobs, education and health care here is one reason we don't have the festering, resentful Muslim problem in the States that Europe has. All we really care about is your money in this country. You earn it, you spend it, welcome to the club!
but I wonder what the reasons are?
There is the obvious tit-for-tat responses (you might be aware that UKians struggle to get into Australia because we placed stronger control on Australians coming here). We cannot legally refuse any European citizen from coming to the UK and working either. I'm sorry your parents can't come here - I'd welcome their tax money, frankly.
I'm game for anyone to come to the UK (important part coming up) as long as they work and pay taxes. We need their labour : it makes the economy stronger, makes our nation more culturally aware and they often fill specific labour gaps (plumbers in the UK) or general jobs that British people seem too damn snooty to accept.
I fear that immigration is not welcome because of religion, race and other predjudice.
//Because the UK has it's reasons.// I think one of the main reasons is the reciprocity of the arrangement - An Englander (like myself) who might want to live and work in the US needs to jump through all manner of hoops of ever decreasing circumference.
It's this hoop jumping that's the deterrent against those (like me, or your parents) who might want to legally enter a country.
Meanwhile, some chap who can't feed his family learns that by working for a friend of his uncle's, he can earn 3 months wages in a week - all he has to do is travel to a far off country and get past the guards.
The problem of immigration is not one of legality and illegality, nor even one of walls and border guards, but ultimately one of equality and economic dynamics. The only way to stop desperate people from risking their lives and breaking the law is to make it nice enough in their own countries in order for them to want to stay there.
Yes, I realise that we all reap the benefits of our own hard work - and why should people of one nation work towards helping those who might be too feckless to help themselves in their own country? - but we have to accept that if we don't help those countries less well off than our own, they will inevitably send people to sneak into our borders and reap the disparate financial rewards. At some point, the cost of building bigger walls and maintaining strict administrative systems will be higher than it would have been to just improve the lives of the citizens in those foreign countries.
So, the only sensible way to stop the immigration problem (the fact that we're arguing about it suggests that there is a problem somewhere, even if we don't all agree exactly what that problem is) is to flatten out the differences between the richest and the poorest - because those are the factors that make large population migrations happen. It's not communism, socialism, or anything quite so distasteful - but is instead, pure, simple, plain old common sense.
I agree. I guess this is another example where the problem is global, and the ultimate solution must also be global - but since we have no means to apply a global solution, we just have to make do with these partial solutions - restrictions, quotas, internment, etc. - which simply can't address the problem with any dignity. Making everywhere as nice as everywhere else might sound ludicrously naive, but I don't see any other approach working.
So in the meantime, we have inflatable concentration camps popping up. It's not so bad, I guess - I mean, if you assume the government are going to intern you somewhere then, brother, in terms of accommodation, you internees never had it so good.
What a depressing thought.
So let me see. We want to make it nicer over there, so that there's less interest in leaving. To that end we will:
1) Buy more energy from outside the country, so more of our wealth goes outside the country, and makes it nicer for the people that live there. Done.
2) Buy more goods from outside the country, so more of our wealth goes there, and makes it nicer for the people that live there. Done.
3) Have more jobs, including higher paying jobs, migrate outside the country, so more of our wealth goes there, and makes it nicer for the people that live there. Done.
Anything else we should put on our list?
We have wealth transfer on an unprecendented scale and pace. If it was going any faster we'd have riots in Seattle. Oh, wait a second...
I do think people that want to come and work should be allowed to do so, and I would welcome it. I think Bush's proposal made the most sense -- perhaps it will pass in some form with this Congress.
Compare this from US (relevant quote: "So what did drive down crime? The panelists didn’t have a grand unified theory, but they offered a few explanations. One was the influx of immigrants to America: studies have shown that crime in a neighborhood drops as the concentration of immigrants increases.") with this from UK (relevant quote: "'Mass migration has brought with it a whole new range and a whole new type of crime, from the Nigerian fraudster, to the eastern European who deals in drugs and prostitution to the Jamaican concentration on drug dealing.").
excellent contradictions.
4) Allow more people from other nations into your country legitimately, pay them the going rate and tax them accordingly. Allow them with ease to send money home to raise the standards in their native country.
Point 2) only works if you're buying at a fair price and in a way that supports the communities
Point 1) Get many requests for immigration from Saudi?
Ian, your US quote says "immigrants" not "illegal immigrants." I keep coming back to this fundamental idea: we need immigrants, but we don't need broken laws. Where people are entering illegally there is crime. Breaking the laws of the land starts you off in criminal territory whether you are a "good person" or not.
jon, I haven't done exhaustive checking on this but I'm pretty confident the US accepts more legal immigrants than the rest of the planet. And again -- I don't really have an issue with more.
I am also completely pro free trade, and though I had a business effectively eliminated by outsourcing never wavered from that opinion.
this excellent site answers your question. In terms of absolute numbers, the US admits the most but in terms of it's 'native' population and in terms of it's GPD, the US lags well behind other countries.
We're in agreement though Arthur (rare, I know :)), immigration is a good thing for a nation, so I do wonder why there is such strong feeling against Mexicans or others who want to start a new life in your country? I don't suppose many of them prefer to live there illegally, I suspect many would like to contribute and become full citizens. Why not let 'em?
Both per capita and per GDP are flawed measures (especially GDP - the US is the richest economy on Earth, largely due to all theat immigration) - you should be doing it by habitable land area.
But in any case, you can't pick and choose statistics like that. If the US admits the most immigratns, it admits the most immigrants.
Here's a quote from a recent dinner conversation:
"We are a Christian country. We have no problem with "these people" coming here. But we don't understand how they want this country to stop being a Christian country".
The speakers were this very nice couple in their early 60s. They live in Lester :)
So I think we in the US have no monopoly on xenophobia, and I will venture to say, will do better in that regard in the end than Europe will.
As the richest (1st), one of the most populus (3rd) and one of the largest geographically (3rd or 4th), flat numbers are not the fairest measure of the USAs immigration policies.
I accept that immigrants by acre is a useful measure, but so is GDP. The richest nations should do more to help the poorest and accepting immigrants is part of that social responsibility.
They come down here, they take our jobs...
(makes me laugh every time)
Peter, that's startlingly disingenuous of you.
Immigrants by acre is daft, since it takes no account of population density - by that measure, surely Canada should take as many as the US - an influx I'm sure they're not prepared for.
Sorry Arthur, would that be Leicester, UK? :)
they pronounced it Lester -- what do I know :)
Illegal immigration is a problem, and I think it always will be. Fine, I accept that. These people come to this country, use its resources, get jobs, and don't pay taxes. Fine, I hate it, but I accept that, too. The very least they can do, then, is LEARN THE FUCKING LANGUAGE. Thank you, that is all.
you go girl.
that is funny
it's an important prerequisite.
So you spell Long Island "Lon Guyland" ??
Their kids will learn english whether they want to or not, if they're going to school here. What irked me was a proposition that came out a year or so ago, to have bilingual schools, to make things easier for the hispanic children. I couldn't believe someone actually came up with that.
California used to have a fairly good system - "english as a second language" would ease spanish speaking children into speaking english. Then a law made it through that removed the system and only allowed english in schools. I have a friend that's an elementary school teacher in California and found it immensely frustrating that she wasn't allowed to speak a word of spanish to a room at least half full of children that didn't understand a word she was saying. Sure, eventually they will learn english through immersion. But by then they'll be years behind in education.
If they need help with English, there are tutors who can help them after school.
A couple of my cousins moved here from Argentina some years ago (legally), and they didn't know a word of English when they got here. They were in an ESL class, and the teacher spoke to them only in English. They learned to speak English very well in a year, because they were forced to speak only that. If they had a hard time in class, they would go for a tutoring session after school.
Woah, just read the article. It's the financial and organisational cheapness of the construction of these prisons which is most alarming: up in weeks, filled in days and, if the need were to arise, easy to shift to another flat expanse of American hinterland. The sheer expediency of it all. The people who are kept in there go from fleeing their own country (for whatever reason) in the hope of finding a new one and find themselves in no country at all. Possibly shifting around the nation, the only glimpses of American life afforded to these poor buggers being when they are bussed from camp to camp, each one under the same sky, only a vague blur of the outside world visible beyond the fencing.
There isn't a question about them coming here, it is about doing it legally. I for one know the econmy will not be hurt... people that employ them abuse them, and treat them like slave labor... if you call that working hard you got to be kidding me. IF they came legally they would have rights as citizens in this country, but.... oh wait.. they want all the perks of citizenship.. but don't want to pay the price.... I would love to work and get more then 70% of my check... would be nice... oh, and the free health care, i worked at a health clinic ... that was a free clinic for children and pregnant women.. the only ones able to get in where illegals... which pisses me off while my stepdaughter an indian american... can't get health care because she has to fight through millions of illegals... Where is it in American law we put all others above ourselves?
Become legal... they will actually save us if they go... Business can compete again, instead of using slave labor... I mean if their culture is so great why are they not beating down their own governemnt and rioting there? Please tell me... oh wait they will get shot and killed thiere, while they hid under our laws that are meant to protect our legal citizens... The bring diseases to our country particulary syphillis and TB, and it goes unchecked... so make the US an third world country... Yes this is a melting pot... but they are to come and assimlate into an "american" culture... not be seperate little tribes... more money is being wasted on healthcare, housing, food stamps... then what they are bringing into our economy... My girl has to go to school with spanish speakign children who don't want to speak english but want our rights? Get off that high horse.. they are ruining our education teachers can't concentrate on our children because thier too busy trying to chase a hispanic population that is trying to assimilate us..... if you want to be here do it legally and learn our language pay taxes... you can't have your cake and eat it to... That is all I ask.
NO to bilingual schools... are there bilingual schools in MEXICO????? would Mexico even consider it? NO
[sigh] What gets me is all these strange, foreign ellipses, coming in and taking the jobs of ordinary punctuation.
Post a Comment