Latina Lista: News from the Latinx perspective > Life Issues > Human Rights > 260 immigrant detention facilities mimic Guantanamo Bay in denying basic legal rights and throwing away the key

260 immigrant detention facilities mimic Guantanamo Bay in denying basic legal rights and throwing away the key

LatinaLista — The trouble with a broken immigration system is that it’s easy for people to fall through the cracks. And the trouble with so many stories about this broken immigration system flooding mainstream media is that it’s too easy for the important stories to get lost in the flood.
' border=
Camp Delta Guantanamo Bay
That’s why when the AP story that was filed a week ago was finally brought to my attention, via my Mexico City-based friend Jesus Chairez, I couldn’t help but think how could anyone miss the importance of this story.
It obviously got attention in Mexico but why not here?
Maybe because it’s a little uncomfortable to know that the U.S. has not only one Guantanamo Bay facility but 260 — and they are literally in our own backyards.

The AP story, Immigrants face detention, few rights held several startling revelations, courtesy of data from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement database (which was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act):

  • As of January 25, 2009, the U.S. detainee population numbered 32,000.
  • Of the total (32,000), 18,690 had no criminal conviction — not even for illegal entry or trespassing.
  • More than 400 detainees with no criminal record had been locked up for at least a year. A dozen had been held for three years or more and a man from China had been locked up for more than five years.
  • Nearly 10,000 had been in custody longer than 31 days.

Yet, this gross miscarriage of justice doesn’t stop with the length of time these immigrants are subjected to prison-like conditions but who all gets caught up in this madness:

But the dragnet has come to include not only terrorism suspects and cop killers, but an honors student who was raised in Orlando, Fla.; a convenience store clerk who begged to go back to Canada; and a Pentecostal minister who was forcibly drugged by ICE agents after he asked to contact his wife, according to court records.
Immigration lawyers note that substantial numbers of detainees, from 177 countries in the data provided, are not illegal immigrants at all. Many of the longest-term non-criminal detainees are asylum seekers fighting to stay here because they fear being killed in their home country. Others are longtime residents who may be eligible to stay under other criteria, or whose applications for permanent residency were lost or mishandled, the lawyers say.

The article also reports that 58 percent of the people detained have no one advocating on their behalf.
That’s why the nonprofit KIND: Kids in Need of Defense, and other lawyer groups around the country, have realized that unaccompanied children are also caught up in this system and have reached out to help these children by providing pro bono representation in immigration courts. But obviously, the need is much greater.
An ironic element revealed by the AP analysis of ICE’s detention facilities shows that incarcerating these individuals costs taxpayers much more than just allowing them to return to their families monitored by an ankle bracelet.

The use of detention to ensure immigrants show up for immigration court comes at a high cost compared to alternatives like electronic ankle monitoring, which can track people for considerably less money per day.
Based on the amount budgeted for this fiscal year, U.S. taxpayers will pay about $141 a night — the equivalent of a decent hotel room — for each immigrant detained, even though paroling them on ankle monitors — at a budgeted average daily cost of $13 — has an almost perfect compliance rate, according to ICE’s own stats.

Yet, to hear former heads of the Department of Homeland Security describe it, undocumented immigrants with ankle monitors is a system that just doesn’t work.
How many more distortions of facts and outright lies have the American public been subjected to just so an administration could carry out the wishes of an extreme sect?
Given the blatant disregard for these people in the detention facilities and knowing what we now know about the effectiveness of the ankle bracelets, there are several points that seem pretty clear:
Shut down all detention facilities. Those undocumented immigrants who are guilty of true crimes like murder, robbery, assault, etc. should be transferred to a regular high-security prison and not mixed with those people whose only crimes are they lack the proper paperwork or are waiting for their asylum hearings.
And why are we imprisoning people who are afraid to return to their home countries and can’t help the fact that the U.S. judicial system refuses to get its act together to expedite their requests? Release them.
Outfit all released individuals with an ankle bracelet.
Expedite all hearings and proceedings so people aren’t left in limbo or give them the necessary documentation so that they can at least find a job to support themselves and their families while they await a verdict.
Give each released individual an ID card of some kind to help know who they are and they can present some form of ID when asked.
And finally, redirect the money allotted to ICE for detention purposes and channel it towards something more constructive, like appointing more judges in immigration and asylum courts.

It would be a far better use of the money than holding people just to give the illusion that a failed immigration policy is actually working.

Related posts


  • Hissy
    March 23, 2009 at 6:07 pm

    Hmmmmmmm ankle bracelets and ID cards? You must be joking…LMAO. Just how many will show up for the court date? We all know how HARD it is to get a FAKE ID.

  • Horace
    March 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm

    “The use of detention to ensure immigrants show up for immigration court comes at a high cost compared to alternatives like electronic ankle monitoring, which can track people for considerably less money per day.”
    I’ve heard this before, and when it has been tried, the advocates whined that it was demeaning to the illegal alien. Ankle bracelets only serve to indicate whether a person has or hasn’t absconded. They do very little to stop someone determined to flee, and when they’re removed, there’s no way to tell where the runner is. ICE could never respond fast enough to apprehend an illegal alien fleeing after removing his ankle bracelet. Should thousands conspire to flee simultaneously, ICE could never respond effectively, as monitoring tens of thousands of illegal aliens is simply an impossible task for our authorities. Using ankle bracelets for the numbers in question would only result in making more work for ICE. I believe that I addressed this dumb idea once before in this blog, but it hasn’t improved with age. My guess is that Marisa had a senior moment.
    If these detentions are so onerus, then why haven’t they served as a deterent against illegal immigration? I suggest that the reason they don’t is that the detentions aren’t as inhumane to the vast majority of illegal aliens as the advocates claim they are, that advocates are exaggerating the small numbers of abuses to further their own agendas. We’ve seen this deceit in their false claims of a large increase in hate crimes against Latinos, it isn’t surprising.
    There’s a sure fire solution to foreign nationals avoiding detention and deportation; that’s not violating our borders at all.

  • Dave Bennion
    March 23, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    I don’t think Horace or Hissy were paying attention to the AP story:
    paroling them on ankle monitors — at a budgeted average daily cost of $13 — has an almost perfect compliance rate, according to ICE’s own stats
    An earlier version of the story listed the numbers in detail, but don’t take the librul media’s word for it, just ask ICE:
    Since inception, ISAP has served over 12,300 participants. The program currently reports a 99 percent total appearance rate at immigration hearings, a 95 percent appearance rate at final removal hearings and a 91 percent compliance rate with removal orders.
    But I’m sure your hypothetical fantasy of tens of thousands of immigrants with GPS bracelets spontaneously bolting is much more accurate. Senior moment indeed!

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 23, 2009 at 11:36 pm

    When I educate Americans about these prison systems they are in shock. Their reaction is not here in American! Its hard to believe…and many of them are private industry built from government contracts from the haliburt group. Americans do not want undocumented workers locked up and abused at the cost of $141.00 a night using our tax money. This is an example of “Pay for Play” which is the illegal act of Private Prisons that exist due to money that had been lobbyed to elect politicians…thus, resulting in government private prison contracts. The CEO George C. Zoley is makeing 5 million dollars a year meanwhile these prisons operate with very little staff. Also, the detainees are given very little medical attention and very little food. I saw in one article that the Cheif Executive of Finance decided to retire from his position this summer. What a TAXPAYERS bargain!! $141.00 a day is more than most Americans make working a job!!

  • Hissy
    March 24, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    I believe those are past figures Mr. Bennion..have you been watching the news today? Just how many of these folks do you think will show up or not if given the choice and risk being deported? The DANGER is RISING fast. I can’t imagine how that must feel to know you might face that area on our BORDER. Obama must be about ready to send troops there..I actually don’t want any deportations to Mexico of non-felon illegal aliens. The crime is not worth dying over. I do expect the illegal’s to GET legal and wait in line in thier OWN COUNTRY as long as it takes. I do grow weary of AMERICAN bashing.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 24, 2009 at 2:54 pm

    91 – 95% rate for ankle bracelets, for 12,300 participants (imagine putting one on all Deportable Aliens, 12,000,000. That would mean more then 1,080,000 would just take off. kinda makes Horace right now doesn’t it Dave?) vs. 99.6% accuracy rate for E-verify @ 305,000,000+ people of the USA. I think E-verify wins hands down.
    As for the $141 per night, I already showed you, Mary, how that amount was in fact no way possible. ICE states, along with every other blogger covering this on both side, $95 per night. This is a combined cost of it’s cheaper for local governments to house Deportable Aliens vs the Federal Government housing them.
    Zoley making $5M per year based on a worldwide business, so what that he makes more than the President. Are you wanting the Presidency to be the highest paid CEO in the country? Do you want Government to control all business? That would make you a Socialist/Marxist/Communist like I called you earlier.

  • Karen
    March 24, 2009 at 2:59 pm

    You’re right that this is just an example of pay for play. The prison industry is private and they exist soley on government contracts. They get money for every illegal immigrant who is jailed. It’s cheaper to put an ankle bracelet on them. It’s also cheaper to deport them.
    Obama needs to step up and take a stand on this like he promised to do during the campapign. Our country is wasting billions f dollars imprisoning people who should nopt be in prison.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 24, 2009 at 8:01 pm

    Karen, since you call this a pay for play argument, you are aware that Zoley, the owner of GEO, has contributed heavily to Democrats. Are you also aware he made campaign contributions to Bill Richardson and Joe Biden.
    Are you also aware that most detention facilities are county and state ran, putting Government money back into the local communities? Here’s 2 links.
    Cities and counties rely on U.S. immigrant detention fees
    HALL COUNTY: Immigration detention center to open, hire 162

  • RealDemocrat
    March 24, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    If the undocumented immigrants would just follow the rules, we wouldn’t have this problem, would we?

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 24, 2009 at 10:18 pm

    Micro, Is the last 8 years of Bush your idea of what capitalisms should look like! The majority of Americans thought it looked like cronism and this mess happened because of lack of leadership and no regulations. If we were to become communist you can blame that on BUSH and his cronnies!! So what if Zoley makes 5 million dollars a year? It would be OK if GEOs cronnies and Zoley didn’t have to be so greedy that he had to use government contracts to expand his business of the witch hunt for immigrants. Do I have a problem with Zoley making more than the president of the United States? Of course I do! and the majority of Americans voiced their opinions when they elected Obama. You say he makes 5 million because he is the CEO of a worldwide business but as long as that business includes taxpayers dollars we have a right to complain. You talk about socialism! You have to be jokeing! It was the last 8 years that made Americans look over to France and admire what they see. Do you actually think that you are going to convince Americans that Zoley is worth 5 million a year. If Zoley is worth 5 million then that means Obama is worth 75 million. Micro…the end of cronism has come. Americans look at these people and view them as criminals and the majority will tolerate NO MORE! We aren’t anger at the undocumented worker…we are angry at the CEOs and their greed that created this mess.

  • Dave Bennion
    March 24, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    I believe those are past figures Mr. Bennion..have you been watching the news today? Just how many of these folks do you think will show up or not if given the choice and risk being deported?
    I presented ICE’s own stats … you presented more speculation.
    I like the tactic of dismissing statistical evidence because it reflects past events. Umm … that’s true of any statistical measurement. Any measurement full stop.
    As for Liquid, you can’t put 12 million people in proceedings without radically changing the entire justice system. I know that’s what the antis want, but it’s not going to happen.
    And e-Verify is not detention or an alternative to detention. Apples to oranges. I might as well point out that 99.6% of AIG execs are scumbags … has about the same relevance.
    ICE itself touts the effectiveness of ISAP … publishing the stats that show that it works. But that’s not good enough for the antis! They’d rather lock ’em all up instead.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 25, 2009 at 10:07 am

    It would be OK if GEOs cronnies and Zoley didn’t have to be so greedy that he had to use government contracts to expand his business of the witch hunt for immigrants.
    It is the Government that is arresting these Illegal Immigrants, Mary, not GEO. Again you blame the wrong person. I have Government contracts in my business as well, have held the contract going now on 15 years. Am I too, a crony?
    For the last 8 years Mary, I have fared quite well under Bush and the economy. Capitalism works quite well in my eyes. What you are referring to is the regulations that were put into place that caused the housing bubble, but you fail to blame the right people in Congress.
    Sorry Dave, I simply gave you the numbers that you said Horace was wrong about. I gave the comparison of E-verify to point out the statistical difference, and since E-verify is at a lower cost then ankle bracelets, it wins hands down there too.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 25, 2009 at 10:36 am

    lol-Micro…I meant to say if we were to lean towards socialism it would be because of 8 years of incompetent leadership from BUSH. (Communism might of happened if we had more of BUSH) but fortunately Americans CHANGED the system before it was too late. (Remember Americans threw the BUSH kindof leadership out). But actually what will become of America is Capitalism regulated by the people (citizens of America)maybe you should start attending all the meetings on a local level across the country. There will be more government jobs and good social programs…and not government contracts given to private industry’s at a rip off price to steal our tax dollars as the result of “Pay for Play”. (The result of Lobbyist’s) Micro…American’s are on top of the system now…they do not like your ideals of more of the same and that includes more of the same old ideals on our broken immigration system. And just like the AIG scumbags…Americans can’t stand the GEO group scumbags (that include’s your beloved George C Zoley and his 5 million dollar salary)!

  • Karen
    March 25, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    States and counties make money from these prisoners so that makes it OK to create a whole industry around imprisoning people? Prisons should not be privatized and for-profit. It’s the government’s responsibility to house prisoners.
    In America we used to build things.

  • Karen
    March 25, 2009 at 12:14 pm

    Re: If the undocumented immigrants would just follow the rules, we wouldn’t have this problem, would we?”
    If they followed the rules, they’d starve to death. That’s been the plan for them for 500 years. Cheap labor or death.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 25, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    States and counties make money from these prisoners so that makes it OK to create a whole industry around imprisoning people? What else do you plan to do with the criminals? As the population grows, so does the criminality factor. Prisons are built because its cheaper to privatize them and pay the private sector vs the Government running the program. Keep in mind, the prisons are built kinda like apartment buildings, its not the owner or the builder that fills it up, it is the persons committing crimes and being caught that fills them. Its only the Governments responsibility to prosecute the criminal and do it in a cost effective way, i.e. privatized prisons.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 25, 2009 at 4:12 pm

    OK Micro…so explain to me how and why do you have those government contracts in your hands and why have you held them for 15 years?? Micro only you know if you are a cronnie?! have you ever donated money to an elected official (Pay for Play)lobbying for contracts. Now Micro, I know if you did a little scanky thing on the side…you will never admit it. lol-Did you make political friends to get the contracts?! You should be so proud of yourself because you fared quite well under the BUSH administration…because Micro…most Americans did not…as a matter of fact many Americans are homeless now while you have faired so well on thier tax dollars. Capitalism works quite well when citizens do not allow cronnies to take advantage of the system. And I am referring to all kinds of cronism…not just the houseing bubble…and that happened because the banks were not regulated. (Pay for Play) takes place from the top all the way down to our communitys on a local level.

  • RealDemocrat
    March 25, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    Re: If they followed the rules, they’d starve to death. That’s been the plan for them for 500 years. Cheap labor or death.
    I thought undocumented workers were nation builders? They’ve been building countries for 500 years?

  • Liquidmicro
    March 25, 2009 at 8:26 pm

    You should be so proud of yourself because you fared quite well under the BUSH administration…because Micro…most Americans did not…as a matter of fact many Americans are homeless now while you have faired so well on thier tax dollars.
    Sorry Mary, I have no guilt, as you see, my work of the Government contracts is through the local Government providing a service that is a requirement. I happened to be the lowest bidder for the contract, which is the best way for the Government to spend money. The taxpayer monies pay for the service I provide, which in turn helps to protect the safety of the environment.
    As for the people of the USA under Bush, they all fared quite well, unemployment was at its lowest for quite some time. People whom are homeless now are simply due to their own greed. They made the choices they made thinking they could afford what they really couldn’t. Bernanke lowering the rate for home purchases was stupidity on Bernanke, he should have raised it. Barney Frank and many others in the Congress are responsible for the new regulations that mandated more people should be buying houses. But you can’t see past the Democrat talking points, and point the finger at everybody else but yourself.

  • Jason Hunter
    March 25, 2009 at 10:12 pm

    Karen- “Re: If the undocumented immigrants would just follow the rules, we wouldn’t have this problem, would we?”
    “If they followed the rules, they’d starve to death. That’s been the plan for them for 500 years. Cheap labor or death.”
    Actually, this is a lie, like so many others perpetrated by advocates. Please cite your evidence of this. Even if this were true, then what kind of people typically have large families only to watch them starve to death? If they were starving to death then wouldn’t they be recipients of UN aid? Please cite where Mexico is a recipient of UN food aid.

  • Hissy
    March 26, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    They don’t need UN aid in Mexico…all the moms and babies are in the U.S. on Wic and food stamps. It must be why they are NOT STARVING to death.

  • Sandra
    March 26, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    BS Karen! Most are not starving down there. They come here because they came make a lot more money, thats all.
    By the way, this nation hasn’t been around for 500 years. Guess you must have flunked history.

  • Karen
    March 26, 2009 at 8:09 pm

    First of all, you need to read a history book about the treatment of indigenous people in the Americas for the last 500 years.
    Secondly, Mexcico is not a recipient of UN food aid. If they got free food in Mexico, then they wouldn’t havr to leave to become cheap labor for America would they?
    And people have big families because in the past the Spanish tried to exterminate them. It’s a survival mechanism.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 27, 2009 at 12:05 am

    The people that are homeless are homeless because of their own greed!!from the unregulated bankers and cronies that destroyed the United States of America. You have to be kidding me when you say!! People fared well under the BUSH administration. WHO!!!?? The wealthy and well connected. The Rich that received their tax breaks, meanwhile the middle class paid the bills. Who Micro!!?? Was it the OIL companys?…or wasnt it the Halibertan group staring Dick Chenney and his friends!…on government contracts using are tax dollars! to make showers so cheaply that our soldiers would be electricuted while they were in Iraq. Meanwhile Dick Chenny and his cronnies put money in their pockets while they took advantage of the people of the United States of America, including deducting money out of the paychecks of our soldiers to do their laundry at a spiked price when our soldiers could have done their own laundry. NO MICRO!! Americans did not fare well under the BUSH administration and they are ANGRY at all the cronies that took advantage of Americans taxdollars and our good men who fought bravely to protect our flag. Those days are over MICRO and you will see overtime that CHANGE is here in America, and it is that CHANGE that you are having difficulty excepting.

  • Sacha
    March 27, 2009 at 11:37 am

    “If they followed the rules, they’d starve to death. That’s been the plan for them for 500 years. Cheap labor or death.”
    A lie, or a statement based on ignorance. I have viewed hundreds of photos of people illegally crossing the southern U.S. border or about to cross. Try using google image search. Only one (1) of the people looked hungry- not starving. He looked like he was from Peru (he had the distinct Inca characteristics. He looked like he had a calorie deficiency, probably from sneaking around Mexico without access to food. It’s not surprising because he had probably entered Mexico illegally and wanted to avoid the police there, who have a reputation for robbing illegals.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 27, 2009 at 4:22 pm

    Mary, your argument does not show any income disparity under Bush. You have done nothing but spout and CodePink talking points. People had money, they refinanced there homes every other month to get the equity out of it. People began living on borrowed money due to their own greed. The economy was doing fine, everything was up, GDP, etc. Then the Dems took control of the Congress, that same month the DOW started going down.
    So, please, show where people did not fare well under Bush and show how it was Bush that caused the credit crisis.

  • Sandra
    March 27, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    Karen, as I said under another topic, the indigenous to this land called the USA now are doing just fine.
    Those indigenous to points south of us had better take up their problems with Mexico and countries further south, not us.
    First I ever heard that the indigenous who were conquered by the Spanish had to procreate a lot to survive. You got a link for that one?
    Besides, how long ago was that and yet those indigenous to south of our border are still procreating like there is no tomorrow.
    I believe it is culture, religion and being uneducated that promotes large families where poverty prevalis.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 28, 2009 at 12:25 am

    Micro, Obviously the people of the US did not feel the same way that you do since they threw anything that resembled the BUSH administration out of office. You can call those poor homeless people living under bridges greedy but I beg to differ and the majority of Americans do too. As far as my talking points…I like to stick to the main ideal…as for like to come up with pointless details to try to justify your arguments and try to manipulate anothers visions of what is really going on.

  • Idler
    March 28, 2009 at 8:31 am

    Perhaps we should give Karen a break. She is essentially saying that the governmental systems and cultures of Latin America are largely failures that depend on racial exploitation and can’t produce enough to support their own people. Thus, the only humane thing is to let them come to the United States, where there is greater freedom and prosperity, based on the Bill of Rights, free markets and capitalism.

  • Horace
    March 28, 2009 at 11:52 am

    Idler said- “Thus, the only humane thing is to let them come to the United States, where there is greater freedom and prosperity, based on the Bill of Rights, free markets and capitalism.”
    Really, Idler, and perhaps we should let another billion or so from other nations such as Pakistan, China, India, Malaysia, etc. to come for the same reasons? We can just give up on promoting democracy, capitalism and freedom in the world and just accept our moral burden to accept the failure of other nations to care for their people. No doubt their governments will be very thankful, as doing their jobs is so burdensome.
    I wonder what kind of country we’d wind up with, as we’ve always made it a national goal to promote ourselves as an illiterate and poverty stricken nation. We could instantly bring national literacy rate down to double digits and have an overabundance of people who’d be very qualified to pick fruit and dig ditches. Accepting everyone who wished to come would easily achieve what you desire.

  • Karen
    March 28, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    Do you know how to read? I said that our own policy, specifically NAFTA, is creating this massive immigration to the US. And it’s only going to get worse under Bush and Obama’s “Plan Mexico,” also known as “The Merida Plan.”
    You heard it here first.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 28, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Mary, your responses simply show you have no earthly idea of what you are repeating, other than talking points. I can give you link after link that proves my points, yet you would simply deny them because they don’t fall under your ideal of what you think you believe outside of your sheltered life. I’m willing to bet you are under 25 YO and have never lived anywhere else other than your gated community. Until you have lived in other parts of the world, or until you move away from Mom and Dad, you will never truly know whats going on out in the real world.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 28, 2009 at 11:07 pm

    lol-Micro…you are clueless to who I am…and how I have lived my life. You are even clueless to how old I am or what countrys I have lived in. If you paid attention to my posts you would have figured out my age but you are way off! 25! (I wish but thank-you for that compliment) lol-Secondly, you might be surprised that I have step out of the box alot more than you. You are all about googles of info. and boreing copy, pastes and posts. Your experiences are on the net. Mine have been real life (playing in bands, Politics, Artists, Musicians etc. all kinds of diverse people) experiences and I wouldnt change it for the world. Im not interested in your links because my info. comes from real situations and testimonys of real people on the streets and thats the way I want it to be.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 29, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Mary, your claims of Diverse people (playing in bands, Artists, Musicians etc.) are all the same type of people, the only diversity may be ethnicity. Where have you “stepped out of the box” other than to quote verbatim advocacy rhetoric? So far from reading your comments, the only country you have visited was Mexico for 6 hours while on a cruise.
    I suggest you do some research on me here, on Marisa’s blog, as I have stated prior that I have lived in Europe, I have traveled through Asia, I own many properties in Portugal, I have lived and return to Honduras yearly, and I have lived throughout the USA.
    Back to the homeless situation, right now the “tent city” in the news is here in Sacramento, where I live. Its plastered all over the news here. I drive by it everyday. This has been an issue here for the past 20 years, its not something new. Whats new about it is that they are moving to areas where they have a possibility to become problems to others, and health wise, problems to themselves.
    These people, if they have family elsewhere, refuse to inform family where they are living, they don’t want the feeling of guilt placed on their loved ones.
    One more thing, where the tent city is now, is only on the other side of the river from where it was in the C Street curve of the Capital City Freeway. They had to move a couple months ago due to the area they were in was being cleared for the railway, in fact many have already returned back to that area as well but you don’t see the news coverage of them. Right now the Governor and the Mayor are getting more beds in Cal Expo’s shelter and other various surrounding shelters, but what they are finding is that these people don’t want to go to the shelters or the protections they provide.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 29, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    Here’s the simple facts about the tent city.
    “Where the tent city is now is literally a toxic waste dump, it’s unsafe, but these people are very resourceful,” Burke said. “Some people are living in squalor, with just a tarp tied to a chainlink fence. But then you’ll see someone with several tents: The tent they live in, plus some outbuilding tents. And they couldn’t be more neat and more tidy. They’re working hard to create a sense of home.”
    Many of the 200 residents of Sacramento’s Tent City, as with those around the country, are not recent victims of the downturn: They are the chronically homeless, some of them mentally ill. But the encampment seized national attention after Oprah Winfrey featured it on her daytime television show, part of a series of reports she has been running on the “new faces” of homelessness.
    So its Oprah spinning it to make you believe that these tent cities are springing up from the newly foreclosed on families. Liberal Propaganda and the imposing of Guilt towards those who are better off. This is your “outside the box” thinking? I call it Liberal Propaganda and rhetoric.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 29, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    Mary says: You can call those poor homeless people living under bridges greedy but I beg to differ and the majority of Americans do too.
    I never stated that the people living under the bridges or in tent cities where living there due to greed. My statement was people lost their homes and there credit simply due to overextending themselves, “People began living on borrowed money due to their own greed.” You equated people who have lost there homes to those who are living in tent cities as the homeless having lost there homes, this is your mistake, so you make an ignominious argument. This shows you have no idea of what you are stating, other than repeating propaganda and talking points
    It is your mere assumption that those in tent cities are families that have lost their homes, which is not factually correct nor the truth. Like I already stated, it is mere Liberal Propaganda to impose some sort of guilt towards those who are better off. You are advocating that guilt, not thinking outside of the box as you claim. You have no knowledge of anything outside of your Liberal sheltered life.

  • Idler
    March 30, 2009 at 6:16 pm

    Horace, my meaning was that Karen’s statements imply the superiority of this nation to others. If it’s inhumane to keep them out, then it must be because this is a better place.
    It ought to be obvious that the United States doesn’t have the capacity to absorb all the poor of the earth.
    Karen also wrote: Do you know how to read? I said that our own policy, specifically NAFTA, is creating this massive immigration to the US.
    You fail to see the implications of what you write, Karen. You also fail to see the absurdity of your myopic ideology. Were no Mexicans immigrating before NAFTA? Was the country comparatively wealthy then? Do we have so many immigrants from El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Colombia and Ecuador because of NAFTA!

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 31, 2009 at 12:21 am

    Im not going to do research on you Micro because I am not interested in where you have lived or where you have traveled. Trust me Micro, I have been to more then Mexico on a cruise. That is true as far as I went with Mexico. I have lived in other countrys before…and I am not giving you the history of MaryElizabeth because it is NONEofYOURbusiness!! As far as bands, Fender Strats and Gibson Les Pauls…(music does touch the souls of many)and it is even better standing on stage with an electric guitar. Diversity is defined the people you meet (of all ethnic backgrounds) in everyday life out on the streets and the people you touch. Ive lived in 2 other countrys and still I am attached to the diversity of NYC and LA. Your negative thoughts on immigration point out to me that you are a mean spirited narrow minded snob that faired well through the BUSH administration lol-and travels with the tourists and has only seen the places you have been to through your pre-paid purchased rose colored glasses. Like I said, you can put me down all you want and all I have to say is…Whatever??

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 31, 2009 at 12:39 am

    And as for my talking points…I plan to stick to them. Your game is that you want to pull me into directions with all your meaningless googled details of rhetoric. My talking points stick to a realistic comprehensive immigration reform. 1)Border Security..It looks like our President it taking care of that now at the Border. 2)Bring all workers out of the shadows and document, fine and send to the back of the line for citizenship. 3)Enforce labor laws…Make sure the employers do not have access to a slave work force in the future…and then open the legal immigration system and make it reasonable. And as far as homeless are concerned Micro…I know many that invested in a small home and lost it. They were not over-extended. They lost there job. It looks like you can not relate since you are traveling all over the world and enjoying a lifestyle while many are starving and can not even afford a roof over their head….meanwhile you write all these non-compassionate posts and brag about your position in life and you tell me what it is like to touch others and live with diversity.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 31, 2009 at 9:37 am

    Mary, you have no details about your numbered sequence.
    1)Border Security – Obama and Napolitano have taken interior enforcement officers and moved them to the border temporarily. SHORT TERM FIX at the border, long term problem for the interior.
    2)We’ll wait to see if any CIR comes out and what is in it.
    3)Enforce Labor Laws – Right now they are being enforced. I suggest you advocate for the changing of Hiring Laws, and mandate the use of E-verify. I suggest you become acquainted with our Hiring laws, specifically USC Title 8 Section 12 subchapter II part VIII 1324. Read this link to get a better understanding of Hiring Laws.
    “To comply with federal immigration laws, every employer is required to verify the employment eligibility of, and complete a Form I-9 (Employment Eligibility Verification Form) for, everyone hired after Nov. 6, 1986.
    Employers who show they’ve made a “good faith” effort to verify employees’ eligibility establish a defense that they have not knowingly hired an unauthorized alien.”
    So you see, its rather simple for the employer to say they have made a “good faith effort”, thereby letting the employer off the hook.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 31, 2009 at 10:54 am

    Oh, Mary, I haven’t put you down, remember I gave you a compliment with the 25 YO statement, when we both know your almost twice that age. In fact your 30 year High School re-union comes up next year. That counter manager job at Bloomingdales must really pay off. Staying for 3 months in Costa Rica does not constitute living there, nor does visiting family back in Italy.
    All I have done was point out your ignominious arguments that have NO base in reality. Your claims of things that have no bearing on the argument. Pointing out all your statements should begin with “I am advocating for” instead of attempting to portray your statements or Propaganda as fact. I point out the points you fail to correct in your argument. The unintended consequences of your actions that you have no answer for. So until these consequences are addressed, I will always be against what you advocate for. I want answers and remediation, not just goody feeling moral propaganda.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 1, 2009 at 1:32 am

    Now Micro…you are getting really weird now. You are a posting troll (many would refer to you as a Stalker). Googling my high school. That is crazy. You do not approve of my career an love for music, politics and people. I guess thats too bad.The Fashion Industry is a career that can Pay off in many ways and many (Divas)woman want my job because it is exciteing and fun. Poor baby im so sorry you do not have as much fun as I do!! Sorry to hear that you work with trees…(Get a guitar) It will make you happy. You see Micro, Not everything is about money. You see some people work in a field’s they enjoy. I heard that you enjoy tree’s for a living Micro. It’s hard to believe you would enjoy anything in nature because you are a mean spirited person that can not understand the love of Art, Music, Politics and life. You can not understand how Americans can care about the undocumented. You come up with rhetoric in hope that you can slow down reform in our country so that America can become a place that all people can live together in harmony. By the way…I have never been to Italy. Ive been to France though. Paris was great. I would like to go to Italy one day and as for Costa Rica…I lived there. I was not a tourist I lived in the rural mountains over there and it was bonita but then there is NYC and that brings me back. Micro, you really can not figure out everything from googles…and you probably never let your poor wife win an argument or have an opinion of some sort.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 1, 2009 at 9:44 am

    You see Mary, when you put personal information on the web, by your own doing, then who’s to blame. I never said that I did not approve of your career, I merely pointed it out.
    I prefer the Viola, Violin, bass, and acoustic guitar over the electric guitar, but don’t fret with my notes.
    You label me as mean spirited simply because I am looking out for my families future, trying to ensure that my children have a good or better life then I did? Because I am a Conservationist and can already see the effects of a large population in the area of my state (Southern California has no water, we have to send it through aqueducts from Northern California, so our water gets rationed here as well)? Farmers are now having to pay for water or there crops die out, that means higher food prices due to overpopulation. While wages go down (depression), costs go up (inflation). What about the Rio Grand, its already polluted! Look at Fargo, ND, being flooded, homes being lost, people being re-located, it happens all over, are we to keep allowing people to come here until we can no longer re-locate people living where they shouldn’t be living to begin with? Because people who don’t know my job attempt to come here and do it, cutting my wages because they don’t have licenses or carry insurances, and butcher trees due to their needing to make money to survive? I can’t hire more people due to them undercutting my business, which in turn hurts my fellow citizens by denying them the opportunity to work at a livable wage and support their family. Because I prefer to help others in their own countries? So why exactly am I mean spirited again, Mary? How many is enough Mary, when we all drink and bathe in polluted water, when there is no more open areas of the country? California is already $42B in the negative due to overspending and regulation and we are the most populated state in the nation. Whats going to happen if we bring in more people? Our infrastructure is already failing, we have some of the worst roads out of all the states.
    If you can answer this one simple question, then I might change my mind:
    Open Borders means that soon, we, too, might be working for pennies an hour. It’s like Adam Smith in reverse: bring in people less free than you, and your own freedom is threatened. People of other countries have their own Governments and people whom can look after them, it is our responsibility to look out for our people first.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 1, 2009 at 10:22 am

    Mary says: You come up with rhetoric in hope that you can slow down reform in our country so that America can become a place that all people can live together in harmony. Your right Mary that’s exactly what I want, sorry you don’t see it that way and you prefer overpopulation and chaos. I guess so much for you wanting everyone to be equal. I guess you like having slave labor for cheap products. Again I ask you to answer that one question.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 1, 2009 at 11:44 am

    I’ll make this as simple as I can for you Mary. Illegal Immigration is not a Moral issue, it is in fact, an Ethical issue.
    Morals allow for the benefit of one group over another i.e. Abortion, Gay Rights, etc. Let me explain, If you are for allowing abortions, it is an ethical allowance, however if you oppose abortions it is a moral allowance. Same with Gay Rights, if you are for Gay Rights it is an Ethical allowance and if you are against Gay Rights it is a Moral allowance. In either one, you have imposed your simple belief onto others without allowing the “other” to have the same Rights as you. Your Morals of Illegal Immigration is what now becomes questionable, where do I have to accept your giving benefits to a group of people over other groups of which are more deserving. You can’t be Moral on some issues and then Ethical on others.

  • Idler
    April 2, 2009 at 8:06 pm

    Great comments, Liquid, but I don’t see the distinction between moral and ethical. As I see it “ethics” is simply the study of what is moral, or morality.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 3, 2009 at 12:46 am

    The Borders need to be secured and their is no debateing that. I agree with that. Its not good for you if your competition dodges the insurance. The key is the enforcment of labor laws. The competition is not going to be deported. It is politically unrealistic. I read all those posts about legalizing drugs and those people need to realise this is politically unrealistic also. But here is what can happen or might happen. CIR will get passed. You need to try to crack down on the people who try to get away without having insurance. Once they are documented and they have invested in the American system it makes it easier for you to go after them(when they own a home) they will live with the same fear we have. (The fear of being sued). CIR helps you in the sense that people have to pay into the system. Such as: Health Care, Car Insurance,etc./by the way I love the Violin I did have one a few years back, I did play a classical piece on the accoustic guitar in a concert my music teacher set up with students. It was alot of work learning how to play that piece of music (I played it great in concert) I do play best by ear and I was trained the classical way. My first intrument was a trombone (yuck I hated it!)Electric guitar is my thing!! I dont play much anymore but I should get back into it. My Uncle was a Violin professor at Ducan University and his son became a famous cancer research doctor. Oh well, I should dust those guitars off.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 3, 2009 at 3:18 pm

    Idler, I used the definitions from Websters in the since that Ethics is: the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group. Where “group” would be the citizens of the USA.
    and Morales is: the mental and emotional condition of an individual or group with regard to the function or tasks at hand.
    You can see the difference now between “principals” and “mental and emotional condition”.

  • Sandra
    April 3, 2009 at 9:05 pm

    Liquid, I noticed that Mary completely dodged your remarks about population growth. If these illegals stay and get legalized, how is that going to fix that problem? Not to mention that once they become citizens they can sponsor all their relatives to come here.

  • Idler
    April 4, 2009 at 9:26 pm

    None of this has any bearing on your argument, so forgive me the semantic quibbles. The second definition you give appears to be for morale rather than morals. Morals or morality signifies a system of right behavior; morale is a measure of motivation or degree of being encouraged or discouraged.
    Again, none of this affects your point. I was just wondering about definitions that interest me.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 5, 2009 at 8:16 pm

    Your right Idler, that’s what I get for trying to type to fast and not pay attention to my spelling.
    Morals is what it should be and not Morales. This is the definition that should have been used: Morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience.
    It is the individual conscience that advocates use as a means to justify there advocacy, while those who are against them are accused as racist, nativist, xenophobic, etc., simply due to their ethical principals.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 6, 2009 at 12:45 am

    Sandra, Once in a while you could lighten up a little. Maybe I wanted to lighten it up with Micro for a post. Do you mind??

  • Liquidmicro
    April 6, 2009 at 9:29 am

    Sandra, what I’ve noticed about the Advocates is that they think by making those here Illegally into legal residents, then that solves any and all other problems as well. Example: Once legalized they will no longer be Illegal, once legal they will pay taxes, when in fact they will then receive tax returns and become even more burdensome, once legal they won’t use the emergency rooms as visits, when in fact they still can’t afford health insurance where will they go? The Advocates don’t care about unintended consequences, or simple economic situations, as our Government is the answer to all their dreams, Robin Hood in action, take from the rich in order to pay for the poor all while business either leaves the country or profits and wages are reduced in order to pay less in taxes, thus reducing any and all Government services or bankrupting our country.
    I see nobody has yet to challenge the one statement I have posed: Open Borders means that soon, we, too, might be working for pennies an hour. It’s like Adam Smith in reverse: bring in people less free than you, and your own freedom is threatened.
    I’ve also noted that Advocates want to remove our Constitutional Rights, specifically the 2nd Amendment, while at the same time granting our Constitutional Rights to those that they are not intended for, go figure.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 7, 2009 at 9:43 pm

    Oh but Micro…you are so into Adam Smith which makes no sense to me…because Adam Smith believed in No Borders, No government control. It makes no sense to me that you like Adam Smith because your way of thinking is not the Adam Smith way of thinking. Adam Smith would not agree with your philosophys and if you do not know that then I suggest you read a book on Adam Smith. Now, as for the emergency room….Dont worry Micro, Universal Healthcare is coming. Scarey, Scarey, BOOOOO!! now dont try to call it socialism. Anything that represents anything that is reasonable for middles class America seems to be a threat to you.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 8, 2009 at 10:51 am

    Mary, I see you don’t see the discordance in my statement. Open Borders means that soon, we, too, might be working for pennies an hour. Its simple economics, bring in people less free than you, and your own freedom is threatened. You must comprehend the statement in order to pass judgment.
    Here is an exert from Adam Smith: The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it. -Adam Smith
    Do you not see the irony now? Adam Smith would be against Unions and Unionization, at no point is he for Open Borders. Even Adam Smith admitted that people were the most difficult baggage to transport over borders. Only those in favour of unbridled capitalism, those who put the short-term interests of employers before anything else, those who cannot see that a society’s boundaries must be protected, can be in favour of ‘open borders’.
    As far as Universal Health Care, might I suggest you hold your breath until it is passed, or better yet if it is passed hold your breath until you are able to be seen, which could take up to a year if it is not a pressing issue. You rely to much on Obama’s promises, which there is no possible way he can control, he is just like you in that regards, an Advocate.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 8, 2009 at 3:34 pm

    Adam Smith’s theory of free trade, embodied in his book The Wealth of Nations, does not say what you think it does. Free trade in his world is limited to goods. The analysis is at the Macro scale, between whole countries. There is no immigration policy embodied in that. Adam Smith style free trade does not call for borderlesness in any way. His theories have been extended by others to our current theory of free trade in services. Balgalore, India is the main beneficiary of this extension, and entry level tech jobs here have been the loser.
    Many Democrats take issue with the free outsourcing that has already destroyed American manufacturing. Now this outsourcing is being extened to the service sector. The middle class is paying the price. They feel under seige. They are in debt and their wages are down. The Liberal alliance with Labor will ensure continued Liberal resistance to even the more basic free trade issues. Free open borders is suicide, and most Liberals know that.
    Now Mary, Please show where Adam Smith was for No Borders when it comes to People or that he would some how agree with you and advocate for the free movement of peoples the same as goods.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 8, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    Adam Smith believed in purchasing power. In other words he believed if someone wants to do the job for 5 bucks an hour then so be it. I do not believe in this. I believe in labor laws and CIR and a normal open immigration system. You need to read the “Wealth of Nations again” because you have come up with your own creative interpretation of the book. I do not agree with Adam Smith and he is not a good example for you to argue your point with. Micro, Adam Smith just isn’t cracked up to what you think he is and he is probably rolling over in his grave right now wishing to debate you!! lol

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 8, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    Micro, Maybe you ought to pick another historical figure to support your argument other than Adam Smith??

  • Sandra
    April 8, 2009 at 6:31 pm

    As for Universal Health Care if it is going to include illegal aliens, it will go bankrupt much like we are experiencing now. How is including them going to aleviate the overcrowing of our medical facilities and emergency rooms? We don’t have enough licensed medical personnel to care for both citizens and illegal aliens, especially with our baby boomer’s increased needs coming up.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 9, 2009 at 5:17 pm

    Mary, please do not try to educate me on Adam Smith, as you are only making yourself look foolish. My point in my statement went right over your head, I even made it simpler, it still went over your head. Adam Smith was a Classical Liberal, as am I, I suggest you look up its meaning. You, on the other hand are a Social Liberal, completely different set of values and beliefs. For you being so into politics, you obviously know very little about anything.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 10, 2009 at 9:40 am

    Adam Smith believed in purchasing power. In other words he believed if someone wants to do the job for 5 bucks an hour then so be it.
    Here is the actual belief of Adam Smith: having money gives one the ability to “command” others’ labor, so purchasing power to some extent is power over other people, to the extent that they are willing to trade their labor or goods for money or currency.
    What this means is that a business owner (gives one the ability to “command” others’ labor) pays his employee a negotiated wage for his labor or services, i.e. an agreement which in turn is paid (a willing trade for labor or services for money or currency).
    I deal with this every single day, I have employees, I have agreements with said employees (the cheaper I can get them to agree to, the better for the client), and I have clients (my employer), which in turn due to operating costs and profit margins, the client pays so much per hour for my services, i.e. my equipment, expenses, and laborers. If you can picture this, business is merely the middle man, between the purchaser of the service and the labor of the service, business provides the means to accomplish said service with the equipment and labor, meaning, you’ve heard the term, “you get what you pay for”.
    Adam Smith economics is from the business side, not the employee side as you are making it out to be. He also believed in that some rules and regulations are needed into which would keep boundaries of said business and protections of said purchaser.
    Adam Smith believed in a nations sovereignty also, and not open borders for people, only goods.
    you have come up with your own creative interpretation of the book.
    Sorry Mary, Its obvious you have very little knowledge of economics. Lets use you as an example, Dior and Bloomingdales both agreed to hire you as a Counter Manager, you have a contract with them for a said price per hour in addition to a percentage of items sold on your employee number and a percentage of items sold on your counter/line product. You probably also get bonuses and have an options plan through Bloomingdales. You are guaranteed an increase in pay based on your quarterly review by your department manager, as are your counter people based on your review of them.
    So you see, you have an agreement with your employer to provide your labor for money, which in turn the business owner makes a profit on your labor and includes its cost in the finished product. Your agreement is what you believe you need in order to survive at a living wage, if you did not believe that, you would find another job that pays more.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 10, 2009 at 10:02 am

    Now lets look at it from your perspective of if someone wants to do the job for 5 bucks an hour then so be it.
    Lets say you are paid $16 per hour at your job, you have been there for some time, you are a benefit to said company because you exceed your duties, you get your raised quarterly and monthly and yearly bonuses. Now say I want to come in there and do your job for say $12 per hour, I have more time in your line of work than you do, i come with high qualifications and excellent reviews from another store where I sold the same line as you, I want your job. Should the company give me your job and fire you? Should the company renegotiate your contract to a cheaper price? Should the company no longer give you bonuses and raises based on your performance?
    Now lets turn that around. You are the one making $12 per hour, instead of $16. I come to your store and apply for your position, would the company hire me at $16, I think not, they would attempt to negotiate me to a cheaper price than you. I would choose to not accept and then would not work for said company.
    Again, Adam Smith believed in employer/employee agreements, contract labor if you will, in a free capitalistic market where the costs of goods/services are based on the costs entailed in manufacturing/providing said product/service.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 10, 2009 at 11:01 am

    Here’s yet another example, maybe easier to understand. I come in your store, I have money to purchase a product, therefor, I have then “commanded” others labor simply by purchasing a product that was made by labor, for which the laborer gets a percentage of that item, a small portion of his/her wages.
    now, on the other hand, a product is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Whats really ironic, is that you have Adam Smith economics all around you yet fail to understand them.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 11, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    Nope! You are twisting around my words. Adam Smith is totally about the Employer not the Employee. He does not believe in rules and regulations. He believes that the Market will work it out on its own. Adam Smith does not believe in Borders. He believes in a Free Market…end of story. Adam Smith wouldn’t bother the immigrants. Sorry to break this to you…but you and Adam Smith are different creatures. Micro, and Knock it off with the “I’m more brillant then everyone else posting here complex”. You are not trying to break Adam Smith down and make it simply?…Hmmm, what you try to do is make it complex thinking you can pull the wool over ones eyes through intimidation. Not with this girl. I see through you style! lol. You have come up with your own creative interpretation of Adam Smith. (Maybe you believe yourself). I hate to burst your little bubble but..Read the Wealth of Nations again!

  • Liquidmicro
    April 13, 2009 at 11:01 am

    I stated he was about the employer, in fact he is more about the Client in the scenario I gave above, the client has the money to purchase the goods. At no point is Adam Smith for open borders for people, only for GOODS. Why else do you think the book is called the Wealth of NATIONS! Simply because he believed in the sovereignty and the wealth of a nation.
    Adam Smith is a Capitalist and Conservative (in today’s sense). What I suggest you do Mary is actually comprehend all his books together, due much better research on him and take a couple of economics classes at a Business College, you might then comprehend Adam Smith. The inky bubble here bursting is your ignorance, please try again.
    Smith’s book was considered to be revolutionary, as it did not deal with the class structure of the age, and the eternal questions of who had what, – And why?
    “… it is not his aim to espouse the interests of any class. He is concerned with promoting the wealth of the entire nation. And wealth, to Adam Smith, consists of the goods which all the people of society consume; note all – this is a democratic, and hence radical, philosophy of wealth. Gone is the notion of gold, treasures, kingly hoards; gone the prerogatives of merchants or farmers or working guilds. We are in the modern world where the flow of goods and services consumed by everyone constitutes the ultimate aim and end of economic life.”17
    And what drives this flow of goods and services: I quote Adam Smith from his The Wealth of Nations:
    “Every individual is continually exerting himself to find out the most advantageous employment for whatever capital he can command. It is his own advantage, indeed, and not that of the society, which he has in view. But the study of his own advantage naturally, or rather necessarily, leads him to prefer that employment which is most advantageous to the society.

    “He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.

    “In civilized society he [man] stands at all times in need of the cooperation and assistance of great multitudes, while his whole life is scarce sufficient to gain the friendship of a few persons. In almost every other race of animals each individual, when it is grown up to maturity, is entirely independent, and in its natural state has occasion for the assistance of no other living creature. But man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favour, and show them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he requires of them. Whoever offers to another a bargain of any kind, proposes to do this. Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want, is the meaning of every offer; and it is in this manner that we obtain from one another the far greater part of those good offices which we stand in need of. It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.”

  • Liquidmicro
    April 13, 2009 at 11:05 am

    I quote Adam Smith:
    “All systems either of preference or of restraint, therefore, being thus completely taken away, the obvious and simple system of natural liberty establishes itself of its own accord. Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man or order of men. The sovereign [politician] is completely discharged from a duty, in the attempting to perform which he must always be exposed to innumerable delusions, and for the proper performance of which no human wisdom or knowledge could ever be sufficient: the duty of superintending the industry of private people.” (The Wealth of Nations, vol. II, bk. IV, ch. 9.)
    Kind throws a wrench in your statement of: He believes that the Market will work it out on its own. Something about as long as he does not violate the laws of justice you don’t seem to comprehend.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 13, 2009 at 11:08 am

    Her is his Conservative point of view:”It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers [read politicians] to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expense. They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in the society. Let them look well after their own expense, and they may safely trust private people with theirs.” (vol. I, bk. II, ch. 3.)
    Again, you look foolish in your own ignorance. Now Mary, take an economics class in business, you might learn something, until then…. your ignorance is simply showing.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 13, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    I’ll give you another easy out Mary.
    What Adam Smith did argue for was the free trade of goods, but what has happened is that goods and capital now move freely and labor doesn’t. There is a free market argument to be made that if capital can cross borders largely without impediment, so too should labor – in other words, people can chase the money.
    This is what your argument is: goods and capital now move freely and so should labor. What you are wanting to do is to add on to what Adam Smith has advocated for. NAFTA is an Adam Smith economic accomplishment, Open Borders for persons is what you advocate for. You’re attempting to progress what Adam Smith believed and where he stopped to further include people in the economic picture.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 13, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    I’ll even help you some more Mary. Adam Smith would agree to the NAFTA agreement, what he would have disagreed with is the Subsidies our Government gives to our farmers, which then becomes unfair to farmers in other countries. This is also why I advocate for the abolishment of farm Subsidies in the USA, this would truly create a fair trade with farmers South of our border and in turn would likely cut down on Illegal Immigration.

  • MaryElizabeth
    April 14, 2009 at 11:06 pm

    Micro, your posts are long and boring and not even worth reading sometimes. Adam Smith is all about the free market. You twist things around everytime. Actually I just discussed this with my brother and he says we are both wrong “Adam Smith is about the Free Market…end of story”. Not about the employer, employee. (That is where we are both wrong) He does not believe in Borders. (This is where you are wrong) “Free Market” sums up Adam smith. I get a kick out of it when you post a book out of insecurity. You are a creature with a complex.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 15, 2009 at 9:25 am

    I’m even willing to bet Mary that the Wealth of Nations you read was not the Glasgow Edition of 1976, but the version which was an edited and critiqued by William Playfair from 1804, which is particularly noted for the way in which Playfair interpolated into Smith’s text his own criticisms of Smith, but did so in identical type face and size to that used to print Smith’s Text, hence, it is difficult to see at a glance which are the words written by Smith and which were those added by Playfair (a politically minded reactionary).
    The laissez faire doctrine, wrongly ascribed to Smith by Playfair, is what you are attempting to use to justify your argument. I suggest you throw your version of the book in the garbage and buy the 1976 Glasgow Edition, the last version as edited by Adam Smith in 1790.

  • Liquidmicro
    April 15, 2009 at 8:37 pm

    How does that song go…. Mary, Mary, quite contrary. I gave you numerous examples of Adam Smiths philosophy of economics, you failed to recognize them.
    Again Adam Smith is for the free market in the since of the Nation and trade with other nations as Fair Trade, my NAFTA example.
    It was evident from the get go you had no idea of the philosophy of Adam Smith or his book Wealth of Nations.
    You stated Adam Smith wouldn’t bother the immigrants, yet you fail to recognize Adam Smiths stance on the Rule of Law: Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man or order of men. In the case of Illegal Aliens, he would be against the employer for unfair business practices and the Illegal Alien, simply for violating the laws of justice of the sovereign nation.
    “Free Market”, you do understand what that is, right? Simply for the sale or price of goods or services. I’m still waiting for you to show where Adam Smith would be for the free movement of people to cross boundaries of sovereign nations in order to work.
    End of class, next time bring the teacher an Apple.

Comments are closed.