Smart or fearful?

ARTICLE: "Spain: Immigrants Welcome: How Spain's open-border policy is driving an economic and social revival"

Somebody call Mark Steyn and clue in Sarkozy: immigration is how you win, and closing borders is how you lose. The smarties lead the way, the fearful wallow (otherwise known as the Brits and French, respectively).

Comments

[PamC]

Have you seen the program on how the harder we make border crossings, the more illegal immigrants we get? The idea is that instead of returning home after the season is over, border crossings are so risky that once they're in the U.S. they stay here instead of returning home (as was once more typical).

I wish I could remember what program it was. If I recall it, I'll post it here.

[John of Argghhh!]

The article is fine as far as it goes - but it does point out that the bulk (3/4ths) of the immigration to Spain is from hispanic- or euro-culture nations. It does seem like it was written by the Wall Street Journal editorial staff, however.

My concern over immigration is one of acculturation and assimilation - unlike in the past, where the incoming groups came in their waves, formed/were pushed into, call it what they were - ghettoes - and then, generally by the third generation, had pushed out and become effectively assimilated, our current political and policy structure seemingly encourages them to maintain a far more separate identity.

An open immigration policy, tied with encouraging that sense of separateness, doesn't seem to me to be a formula for success.

[jim]

Right, the key is that most of their immigrants are coming from fairly assimilable populations. And Romania is more than just Eastern European. Romanian is a romance language (like Spanish), which makes it easier to learn Spanish and adapt for a Romanian than, say, a Pole.

The immigration problems that rich Europe has have been much more with their Muslim immigrants. Much greater cultural gulf to bridge.

...

As to here in America. Most of our immigrant groups are doing fine. There is a risk of some irredentism developing out of Mexicans in the Southwest, but that's a very low probability. And the more the Mexicans fan out across the US (which has happened since the 90s), the more they will assimilate.

I know a lot of successful 2nd generations immigrants (from Lebanon, Thailand, China, Ecuador, Argentina, Vietnam and Korea) and they all have some older family members who've chosen to live in isolated ghettos. That will always be there. But most choose the wider American world. Mexicans have more opportunities to hide like that, because there are more linguistic ghettos for them. But even there, most choose English.

I'm sure we'll get occasional La Raza radicals over the next 50 years, but they are fighting a losing battle. They're trying to keep their kids and grandkids from going to see Spider-man and Shrek

We don't have a precedent of assimilating Muslims nearly as well. Arabs, yes, but most of our Arabs are the Christians who lost various civil wars. (Like my Lebanese friends.) And most of our Muslims are balck, ie Nation of Islam members (who, of course, are heretics wrt Sunni or Shia muslims since they have a 20th century American prophet). That will change shortly as we have more Muslim immigrants. Hopefully they'll fit in. We'll see.

[ry]

The SoCal kid has to speak here. That may be the national trend but what of the effect in the SW? Is it cool for them to suffer while those of us who live(or have moved) East enjoy the benefits?

My mom has lived in the same house since '67. Her sewage bill has tripled in the last 10 years. Why? Tax on gas has increased. Why? All kinds of things have increased in price with lesser returns for what she pays. Why?

How do you start a business in that environment? How do you raise a family when a good chunk of the schools are a hairs breadth away from being taken over by the state or the federal govt because they're failing(with the most common cause for failure being over crowding)?

Nobody wants to shut down the border(nobody serious that is). But willy-nilly sucks and has REAL costs people who don't live there never see and, apparently, don't care about. Doesn't effect them. That's what annoys me about Doc's approach. He sounds a bit like Goeffry Rush in "Shakespear in Love' with such pithy comments as this post(there's lots of room to be cemented up, this is his living room on the internet and all). Nobody serious wants to shut the border. What we want is numbers that make sense and to minimize the downside, instead of just saying 'It'll all work out in the end.' That's it. That means tackling the busted immigration system to get numbers and methods that make sense and a serious commitment to reducing illegal immigration.

Why? Because unrestrained is bad for the immigrant as much as it is for the native. Look at the mistreatment of field hands in the Central Valley(CA). The sweat shops of the garment district of Los Angeles. Mom's tripled garbage collection and sewage bills(that hits the immigrants too, unless they're just skipping out on it). No, there's a hell of a lot more to be said other than 'it'll all work out, stop being racist dicweeds.' (mostly because nobody serious about it gives a rat's ass about race in this, since we're all going to have descendents that have at least one African, one Asian, and one South American ancestor in 200 years(as Dan's upcoming marriage plays into(woohoo Dan!), so that's just a flat out canard.)

[Michael]

There's a common thread to these comments I'm not sure has been noticed by a lot of readers. How many of the problems come from the numbers and sources of immigration, and how many come from handling it poorly?

If immigrants are shoved into ghettos and denied the chance to assimilate, or local companies benefitting from the immigration aren't paying the resulting costs, then YEAH; the immigration will be unsustainable. That's true whether you're American absorbing Mexican and Chinese immigrants, or Europe absorbing Muslim and African immigrants.